Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From hans wulf
Subject Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible?
Date
Msg-id 20110311175439.6380@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible?  (Maciek Sakrejda <msakrejda@truviso.com>)
Responses Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible?  (Kenneth Marshall <ktm@rice.edu>)
List pgsql-performance
Thanks for the answer.

so there's no way around this problem? A nice index bitmap merge thing would be super fast. Big table ANTI JOIN queries
withonly a few results expected, are totally broken, if this is true.  

This way the query breaks my neck. This is a massive downside of postgres which makes this kind of query impossible.
Mysqlgives you the answer in a few seconds :-( 



> Possibly because the index entries you're anti-joining against may
> point to deleted tuples, so you would erroneously omit rows from the
> join result if you skip the visibility check?
>
> ---
> Maciek Sakrejda | System Architect | Truviso
>
> 1065 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Suite 215
> Foster City, CA 94404
> (650) 242-3500 Main
> www.truviso.com

--
Schon gehört? GMX hat einen genialen Phishing-Filter in die
Toolbar eingebaut! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/toolbar

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: fork
Date:
Subject: Re: Tuning massive UPDATES and GROUP BY's?
Next
From: Kenneth Marshall
Date:
Subject: Re: ANTI-JOIN needs table, index scan not possible?