At 11:31 PM 7/13/03 -0300, Chris Bowlby wrote:
Woops, this might not go through via the address I used :> (not
subscribed with that address)..
>At 01:46 PM 7/13/03 -0700, Steve Wampler wrote:
>
> The following left join should work if I've done my select right, you
> might want to play with a left versus right to see which will give you a
> better result, but this query should help:
>
> SELECT * FROM attributes_table att LEFT JOIN attributes at ON (at.name =
> 'obsid' AND at.value = 'oid00066') WHERE att.id = at.id;
>
>>On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 08:09:17PM +0100, Richard Huxton wrote:
>> > > I'm not an SQL or PostgreSQL expert.
>> > >
>> > > I'm getting abysmal performance on a nested query and
>> > > need some help on finding ways to improve the performance:
>> > [snip]
>> > > select * from attributes_table where id in (select id from
>> > > attributes where (name='obsid') and (value='oid00066'));
>> >
>> > This is the classic IN problem (much improved in 7.4 dev I believe). The
>> > recommended approach is to rewrite the query as an EXISTS form if
>> > possible. See the mailing list archives for plenty of examples.
>> >
>> > Could you not rewrite this as a simple join though?
>>
>>Hmmm, I don't see how. Then again, I'm pretty much the village
>>idiot w.r.t. SQL...
>>
>>The inner select is locating a set of (2049) ids (actually from
>>the same table, since 'attributes' is just a view into
>>'attributes_table'). The outer select is then locating all
>>records (~30-40K) that have any of those ids. Is that really
>>something a JOIN could be used for?
>>
>>-Steve
>>--
>>Steve Wampler -- swampler@noao.edu
>>Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota
>> monax materiam possit materiari?
>>
>>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
