Re: UNION versus SUB SELECT - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From desmodemone
Subject Re: UNION versus SUB SELECT
Date
Msg-id CAEs9oFmV2HWAvjD8ewcLGjWOXxc4vwFyWWZ9t62wr30C+FsaZA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: UNION versus SUB SELECT  (Robert DiFalco <robert.difalco@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: UNION versus SUB SELECT  (Robert DiFalco <robert.difalco@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Could you please attache the plan with explain buffers verbose?

thank you


2013/11/21 Robert DiFalco <robert.difalco@gmail.com>
UNION and subselect both performed better than EXISTS for this particular case.


On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:31 PM, desmodemone <desmodemone@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Robert, could you try with "exists" ?

SELECT c.* 
FROM contacts c
WHERE  exists  ( SELECT  1 FROM phone p WHERE p.addr =? and  p.contact_id=c.id )
OR exists (SELECT  1 FROM email e WHERE e.addr = ? and  e.contact_id=c.id );





2013/11/21 Robert DiFalco <robert.difalco@gmail.com>
I have found this:

SELECT c.* 
FROM contacts c
WHERE c.id IN ( SELECT p.contact_id FROM phone p WHERE p.addr = ? )
OR c.id IN (SELECT e.contact_id FROM email e WHERE e.addr = ? );

To have a worse plan than:

SELECT * FROM contacts where id IN (
( SELECT c.id FROM contacts c 
JOIN phone p ON c.id = p.contact_id AND p.addr = ? 
UNION
SELECT c.id FROM contacts c 
JOIN email e ON c.id = e.contact_id AND e.addr = ? );

Maybe this is no surprise. But after discovering this my question is this, is there another option I dont' know about that is logically the same that can perform even better than the UNION?



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Robert DiFalco
Date:
Subject: Re: UNION versus SUB SELECT
Next
From: Robert DiFalco
Date:
Subject: Re: UNION versus SUB SELECT