Marti Raudsepp writes:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 23:59, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Could we see the pg_stats rows for the two join columns?
> Sure, but I don't want to send this out to the public list since
> [ it's private data ]
Thanks for the data. I set up a comparable test case and duplicated
you
Marti Raudsepp writes:
> After a bit of digging, I figured out that it uses the same estimate
> as a semi-join WITHOUT the client_id restriction.
> ...
> For whatever reason, the 1st query completely ignores the fact that
> the client_id clause reduces the result count by a large factor.
Could we
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 16:34, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2011-08-31 at 15:38 +0300, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
>> I'm getting really surprising planner estimates for a query that's
>> joining another table via a varchar field. All of this was tested on
>> PostgreSQL 8.4.8, 9.0.4 and 9.1rc1.
>
>
On ons, 2011-08-31 at 15:38 +0300, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> I'm getting really surprising planner estimates for a query that's
> joining another table via a varchar field. All of this was tested on
> PostgreSQL 8.4.8, 9.0.4 and 9.1rc1.
By any chance, did it work better in 8.4.7?
--
Sent via pgs
Hi list!
I'm getting really surprising planner estimates for a query that's
joining another table via a varchar field. All of this was tested on
PostgreSQL 8.4.8, 9.0.4 and 9.1rc1.
The original query is pretty huge, but I managed to shrink it down to this:
SELECT * FROM email_message where email_
