Re: - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re:
Date
Msg-id 20070626003339.GH7531@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re:  (Ed Tyrrill <tyrrill_ed@emc.com>)
List pgsql-performance
* Ed Tyrrill (tyrrill_ed@emc.com) wrote:
> It seems to me that the first plan is the optimal one for this case, but
> when the planner has more information about the table it chooses not to
> use it.  Do you think that if work_mem were higher it might choose the
> first plan again?

Seems likely to me.  You understand that you can set the work_mem
whenever you want, right?  It's a GUC, so you could issue a 'set
work_mem = blah' in the application code right before and right after
(assuming you're going to continue using the session) this particular
query, or just do it in a seperate session using 'explain' to play
around with what the planner does given different arguments.

'explain's pretty cheap/easy, and you can play around with various
settings to see what PG will do in various cases.  Of course, you won't
know the runtimes without doing 'explain analyze', but I think you have
a good idea of the best plan for this query already...

    Thanks,

        Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Ed Tyrrill
Date:
Subject: Re:
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: