Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 04/20/2014 07:46 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: >> btw, 9.4 should be wiser in case of rare+common terms, thanks to GIN >> fast scan feature. > Indeed, although we didn't actually do anything to the planner to make > it understand when fast scan helps. The given query has nothing to do with rare+common terms, since there is only one term in the search --- and what's more, the planner's estimate for that term is spot on already (755 estimated matches vs 752 actual). It looks to me like the complaint is more probably about inappropriate choice of join order; but since we've been allowed to see only some small portion of either the query or the plan, speculating about the root cause is a fool's errand. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
