Re: [SQL] Good Optimization
От | secret |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [SQL] Good Optimization |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 37933011.CB0F3E76@kearneydev.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [SQL] Good Optimization (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [SQL] Good Optimization
|
Список | pgsql-sql |
Tom Lane wrote: > secret <secret@kearneydev.com> writes: > > There is a simple way to optimize SQL queries involving joins to > > PostgreSQL that I think should be handled by Postgre? If one is joining > > a tables a,b on attribute "x" and if one has something like x=3 then it > > helps A LOT to say: a.x=3 and b.x=3 in addition to saying a.x=b.x ... > > The example below shoulds the radical speed gain of doing this, and I > > think it isn't something real obvious to most people... > > How much *actual* speedup is there? I don't trust the optimizer's > numbers as anything more than relative measures ;-) > > I'm a bit surprised that you are getting a nested-loop plan and not > a merge or hash join. With a merge join, at least, there ought not be > a large difference from providing the additional qual clause (I think). > What Postgres version are you using? > > regards, tom lane The actual performance difference is HUGE. Hours vs minutes or Minutes vs Seconds... David Secret MIS Director Kearney Development Co., Inc.
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: