>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 11:05 am, in message <16076.1141146348@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The limiting factor is that EXISTS subplans > aren't flattened ... and once that's fixed, I doubt the example would > need any new kind of join support. I rewrote the query to use IN predicates rather than EXISTS predicates, and the cost estimates look like this: EXISTS, no index: 1.6 billion EXISTS, with index: 0.023 billion IN, no index: 13.7 billion IN, with index: 10.6 billion At least for the two EXISTS cases, the estimates were roughly accurate. These plans were run against the data after the fix, but analyze has not been run since then, so the estimates should be comparable with the earlier post. I'm not used to using the IN construct this way, so maybe someone can spot something horribly stupid in how I tried to use it. -Kevin
Attachment:
datafix-in-plan1.txt
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
datafix-in-plan2.txt
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
datafix-in.qry
Description: Binary data
