Re: Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?
От | Jaime Casanova |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3073cc9b0806292133l397f0d8etef06b5bb3aba13ae@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Subquery WHERE IN or WHERE EXISTS faster?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Ulrich <ulrich.mierendorff@gmx.net> writes: >> People say that [EXISTS is faster] > > People who say that are not reliable authorities, at least as far as > Postgres is concerned. But it is always a bad idea to extrapolate > results on toy tables to large tables --- quite aside from measurement > noise and caching issues, the planner might pick a different plan when > faced with large tables. Load up a realistic amount of data and then > see what you get. > i've made some queries run faster using EXISTS instead of large IN clauses... actually, it was NOT EXISTS replacing a NOT IN while i'm not telling EXISTS is better i actually know in some cases is better -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. (593) 87171157
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: