Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: Abysmal hash join
- From: Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>
- Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: Abysmal hash join
- Date: 11 Sep 2006 20:56:27 -0400
- Message-id: <87k649q4w4(dot)fsf(at)stark(dot)xeocode(dot)com>
Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de> writes: > I've done that. Fortunately, ANALYZE time didn't increase by that > much, compared to the default (by just a factor of 10). With really high stats times you also have to keep an eye on planning time. The extra data in the stats table can cause planning to take longer. -- greg
- References:
- Abysmal hash join
- From: Florian Weimer
- Re: Abysmal hash join
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: Abysmal hash join
- From: Florian Weimer
- Re: Abysmal hash join
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: Abysmal hash join
- From: Florian Weimer
- Abysmal hash join
- Prev by Date: Re: Configuring System for Speed
- Next by Date: Re: Performance problem with Sarge compared with Woody
- Previous by thread: Re: Abysmal hash join
- Next by thread: Bad plan for join to aggregate of join.
- Indexes: