Re: IN not handled very well? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: IN not handled very well?
Date
Msg-id 8361.1159120674@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to IN not handled very well?  (Ben <bench@silentmedia.com>)
Responses Re: IN not handled very well?
List pgsql-performance
Ben <bench@silentmedia.com> writes:
>                             ->  Hash IN Join  (cost=51.67..31794.72
> rows=218 width=4)
>                                   Hash Cond: (("outer".puid)::text =
> "inner".name)
>                                   ->  Seq Scan on puid
> (cost=0.00..23495.21 rows=1099421 width=44)

>                             ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on puid
> (cost=20.03..59.52 rows=10 width=4)
>                                   Recheck Cond: ((puid =
> 'f68dcf86-992c-2e4a-21fb-2fc8c56edfeb'::bpchar) OR (puid =
> '7716dbcf-56ab-623b-ab33-3b2e67a0727c'::bpchar) OR (puid =


Apparently you've got a datatype mismatch: name is text while puid is
char(N).  The comparisons to name can't be converted into indexscans
on puid because the semantics aren't the same for text and char
comparisons.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Ben
Date:
Subject: IN not handled very well?
Next
From: Ben
Date:
Subject: Re: IN not handled very well?