On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>>> Yeah, I can generate one pretty easily; the behavior is readily
>>> observable and repeatable. Will get on it RSN, but at you said, we're
>>> not doing anything about it for 9.0.
>
> Well, I can generate a test case, but on examination it turns out to be
> nothing to do with partitioning; it's just good old "n-distinct
> underestimation", and not really related to partitioning or joins.
Ah. Well in 9.0 there will be a work around, by me as it happens. :-)
...Robert
