Wes <wespvp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > This appears to be very inefficient. B is almost two orders of magnitude > larger than A. C is about 3-4 times as big as B (record count). My > statement (with the same single 'B' table as above) produces: If it's only a factor of 3-4 then the merge join should be faster. If it's really two orders of magnitude (100x?) then the nested loop below would be faster. I think in 8.1 (and I think in 8.0 too) the planner is capable of coming up with both plans for the NOT IN query though. -- greg
