Re: NOT IN and NOT EXIST - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Sameer Kumar
Subject Re: NOT IN and NOT EXIST
Date
Msg-id CADp-Sm5AxY3EzDDk2XzNO8gcu8GEbOzv3YzzS0KLPEzzc1gBNA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: NOT IN and NOT EXIST  (Steve Crawford <scrawford@pinpointresearch.com>)
Responses Re: NOT IN and NOT EXIST  (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@dalibo.com>)
List pgsql-general

On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Steve Crawford <scrawford@pinpointresearch.com> wrote:
You can easily test this for yourself using explain.
​I tried it out.

NOT EXISTS translates to HASH ANTI JOIN and NOT IN translates to NOT (HASHED) operation.

Given that the columns used in NOT IN clause (for outer as well as inner) are NOT NULL, should not it translate a NOT IN plan similar to NOT EXISTS plan?


Also note that depending on the version of PostgreSQL and the nature of your data it could be preferable to use WHERE IN... or to use EXISTS. Fortunately as the planner has been imbued with ever increasing smarts, the need to test and choose between the two seems to have diminished.

Postgres already does that for IN and EXISTS. Both would try to use HASH. But does not seem to be the case with NOT IN and NOT EXISTS.



Best Regards,

Sameer Kumar | Database Consultant

ASHNIK PTE. LTD.

101 Cecil Street, #11-11 Tong Eng Building, Singapore 069533

M: +65 8110 0350  T: +65 6438 3504 | www.ashnik.com

icons

 

Email patch

 

This email may contain confidential, privileged or copyright material and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s).

Attachment

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Bosco Rama
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore
Next
From: David Wall
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump slower than pg_restore