2017-01-11 4:05 GMT+13:00 Tomas Vondra :
> On 01/10/2017 04:05 AM, Patrick B wrote:
>
>> 3,581 individual pokes into the heap to confirm tuple visibility
>> and apply the deleted filter - that could indeed take a while.
>> David J.
>>
>>
>> I see.. The deleted column is:
>>
>> delete
On 01/10/2017 04:05 AM, Patrick B wrote:
3,581 individual pokes into the heap to confirm tuple visibility
and apply the deleted filter - that could indeed take a while.
David J.
I see.. The deleted column is:
deleted boolean
Should I create an index for that? How could I improve
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Patrick B wrote:
> 3,581 individual pokes into the heap to confirm tuple visibility and
>> apply the deleted filter - that could indeed take a while.
>> David J.
>
>
> I see.. The deleted column is:
>
> deleted boolean
>
> Should I create an index for that? How c
>
> 3,581 individual pokes into the heap to confirm tuple visibility and
> apply the deleted filter - that could indeed take a while.
> David J.
I see.. The deleted column is:
deleted boolean
Should I create an index for that? How could I improve this query?
Does it execute as slowly when y
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Patrick B wrote:
> *Explain Analyze:*
>
> CTE Scan on "query_p" "qp" (cost=0.01..1060.57 rows=1 width=8) (actual
> time=4065.244..4065.246 rows=1 loops=1)
>
> CTE query_p
>
> -> Result (cost=0.00..0.01 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=0.002..0.003
> rows=1 loo
On 10 January 2017 at 14:06, Patrick B wrote:
> -> Index Scan using "clientid_customers" on "customers" "c"
> (cost=0.00..1059.01 rows=607 width=0) (actual time=9.105..4063.728 rows=2513
> loops=1)
> Index Cond: ("clientid" = "qp"."client_id")
> Filter
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I've got the following Query:
>
> WITH
>
>query_p AS (
>
>SELECT CAST(6667176 AS
> BIGINT) AS client_id),
>
>
>
>
> clients AS (
>
>SELECT
>
Hi guys,
I've got the following Query:
WITH
query_p AS (
SELECT CAST(6667176 AS
BIGINT) AS client_id),
clients AS (
SELECT