Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>
- To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- Cc: "Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, "H.J. Sanders" <hjs(at)rmax(dot)nl>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 12:59:42 -0500
On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 09:44, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> writes: > > If someone's going to commit to putting effort into improving the > > planner then that's wonderful. But I can't recall any significant > > planner improvements since min/max (which I'd argue was more of a bug > > fix than an improvement). > > Hmph. Apparently I've wasted most of the last five years. I appreciate the work, and trust me, I've noticed the changes in the query planner over time. Thanks for the hard work, and I'm sure there are plenty of other thankful people too.
- References:
- FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- From: H.J. Sanders
- Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- From: Mark Kirkwood
- Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- From: Jim C. Nasby
- Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- From: Tom Lane
- FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- Prev by Date: Re: Hints proposal
- Next by Date: Re: Scrub one large table against another
- Previous by thread: Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- Next by thread: Re: FW: Simple join optimized badly?
- Indexes: