Eric Raskin <eraskin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> And, of course, your explanation that inserts will not be parallelized must
> be the reason. I will certainly re-vacuum the tables. I wonder why
> auto-vacuum didn't collect better stats. vacuum analyze <table> is all I
> need, right?
Plain ANALYZE is enough to collect stats; but I doubt that'll improve
matters for you. The problem is basically that the planner can't do
anything with a CASE construct, so you end up with default selectivity
estimates for anything involving a CASE, statistics or no statistics.
You need to try to reformulate the query with simpler join conditions.
> As a last resort, what about a PL/PGSQL procedure loop on the query
> result? Since the insert is very few rows relative to the work the select
> has to do, I could just turn the insert.. select.. into a for loop. Then
> the select could be parallel?
Maybe, but you're still skating on a cliff edge. I think it's pure chance
that the parallelized query is working acceptably well; next month with
slightly different conditions, it might not.
regards, tom lane
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric H. Raskin 914-765-0500 x120 or 315-338-4461 (direct)
Professional Advertising Systems Inc. fax: 914-765-0500 or 315-338-4461 (direct)
3 Morgan Drive #310 eraskin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Mt Kisco, NY 10549 http://www.paslists.com
