Re: Optimization via explicit JOINs

Darn.  Well, one of the queries picked that 1 row was going to survive
the nested loop step and the other said 14.  I was wondering which one
was closer to being correct at that time.

On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, David Olbersen wrote:

> On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> 
> ->As a question, how many rows does
> ->select * from playlist p join songs s using (song_id) where
> ->p.waiting=TRUE;
> ->actually result in?
> 
> Well it depends. Most of the time that playlist table is "empty" (no rows where
> waiting = TRUE), however users can (in a round about way) insert into that
> table, so that there could be anywhere from 10, to 2,342, to more.
> 
> Why do you ask?
> 
> (The reason those plans chose 14 was because, at the time, there were 14 rows in
> playlist)