Re: Planner choosing NestedLoop, although it is slower... - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Mario Splivalo
Subject Re: Planner choosing NestedLoop, although it is slower...
Date
Msg-id 4E1CDF52.4020208@megafon.hr
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Planner choosing NestedLoop, although it is slower...  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
On 07/13/2011 12:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mario Splivalo<mario.splivalo@megafon.hr>  writes:
>> On 07/12/2011 10:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What you need to look into is why the estimated join size is 9400 rows
>>> when the actual join size is zero.  Are both tables ANALYZEd?  Are you
>>> intentionally selecting rows that have no join partners?
>
>> Yes, both tables have been ANALYZEd. What do you mean, intentilnaly
>> selecting rows taht have no join partners?
>
> I'm wondering why the actual join size is zero.  That seems like a
> rather unexpected case for a query like this.

It is true that this particular query returns 0 rows. But it's created
by django, and I can't do much to alter it.

    Mario

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: lars
Date:
Subject: Re: UPDATEDs slowing SELECTs in a fully cached database
Next
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: UPDATEDs slowing SELECTs in a fully cached database