"Robins Tharakan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Besides, I did a simple test and although you are right about the optimizer
> deducing implied equality conditions, this holds true only for a direct
> join. In the second query, the optimizer recommends a table scan even for a
> simple IN() condition
> While the optimizer theoretically could deduce the extra restriction
> condition, it doesn't attempt to. It's extremely unclear that the extra
> cycles to look for such cases would be repaid on average, because cases
> like this aren't that common. The current state of affairs is that
> the sys
"Robins Tharakan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In case of an INNER JOIN, shouldn't the second condition (in Query2) be
> unnecessary ?
> Or am I being unreasonable in this expectation ?
> SELECT n1.scheme_code
> FROM nav n1
> INNER JOIN nav n2 ON n1.scheme_code = n2.scheme_code
> WHERE n1.sch
Hi,
I am not sure if this is a simple (... stupid) question but I just wasted
two hours optimizing a query, so I thought I should drop in to ask.
The only difference between query1 and query2 (below) is that despite an
explicit INNER JOIN, I have repeated the same condition for n2 (as given for
n
