Re: UNION and bad performance - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From pinker
Subject Re: UNION and bad performance
Date
Msg-id 1402235935505-5806445.post@n5.nabble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: UNION and bad performance  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
>> rhaas=# explain select a from generate_series(1,100) a union select a
>> from generate_series(1,100) a;
>>                                      QUERY PLAN
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> HashAggregate  (cost=45.00..65.00 rows=2000 width=4)
>>   ->  Append  (cost=0.00..40.00 rows=2000 width=4)


Why in this case the estimated number of rows is 2000? Is it standard
planner behavior?





--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/UNION-and-bad-performance-tp3301375p5806445.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Shaun Thomas
Date:
Subject: Re: postgres files in use not staying in linux file cache
Next
From: Timothy Garnett
Date:
Subject: Query memory usage greatly in excess of work_mem * query plan steps