| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrea Arcangeli <andrea(at)cpushare(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: NOT LIKE much faster than LIKE? |
| Date: | 2006-01-10 02:54:57 |
| Message-ID: | 20060109185355.S36990@megazone.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> I see. I can certainly fix it by stopping using LIKE. But IMHO this
> remains a bug, since until the statistics about the numberof matching
> rows isn't estimated well, you should not make assumptions on LIKE/NOT
> LIKE. I think you can change the code in a way that I won't have to
> touch anything, and this will lead to fewer surprises in the future IMHO.
I doubt it, since I would expect that this would be as large a
pessimization for a larger fraction of people than it is an optimization
for you.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrea Arcangeli | 2006-01-10 03:47:21 | Re: NOT LIKE much faster than LIKE? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-01-10 02:54:44 | Re: NOT LIKE much faster than LIKE? |