"Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 08:21:18AM -0500, Josh Harrison wrote:
>> > > *Query1*
>> > > SELECT person_id FROM person WHERE (column1=1 AND column2='62')
>> > > INTERSECT
>> > > SELECT person_id FROM person WHERE (column1=1 AND column2='189')
>
>> I get the same plan(see below) with 'sort' for 'intersect all' operation
>> too. Why is intersect not an effecient way? Is there any other way this
>> query/index can be written/created so that I can get the intersect results
>> in an efficient way?
>
> Set operations are rather inefficient. To find the intersection of two
> arbitrary sets you need to sort them and compare.
I think all the set operations are implemented this way. It's actually a
pretty clever plan if you're processing two large lists without indexes but,
it would be nice to support a fuller set of plans like we do for other kinds
of queries. For INTERSECT star-schema joins might actually be best.
> A query like you write would be better expressed as a join, something like:
>
> SELECT a.person_id
> FROM (SELECT person_id FROM person WHERE (column1=1 AND column2='62') a,
> (SELECT person_id FROM person WHERE (column1=1 AND column2='189') b
> WHERE a.person_id = b.person_id;
>
> or perhaps:
>
> SELECT a.person_id
> FROM person a, person b
> WHERE a.column1=1 AND a.column2='62'
> AND b.column1=1 AND b.column2='189'
> AND a.person_id = b.person_id;
Or using an IN or EXISTS query:
SELECT person_id
FROM person
WHERE column1=1
AND column2='62'
AND person_id IN (
SELECT person_id
FROM person
WHERE column1=1
AND column2='189'
)
or
SELECT person_id
FROM person AS parent
WHERE column1=1
AND column2='62'
AND EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM person
WHERE parent.person_id = person_id
AND column1=1
AND column2='189'
)
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!
