From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Performance weirdness with/without vacuum analyze |
Date: | 2003-10-13 17:40:11 |
Message-ID: | 87fzhx2g04.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Harry Broomhall <harry(dot)broomhall(at)uk(dot)easynet(dot)net> writes:
> I'm not entirely sure how I would do this, as the 'lookup' is actualy
> a join. I thought that the order of nameing the joined tables didn't
> matter (except for 'left' and 'right'), similar to the fact that 1 + 2 is
> the same as 2 + 1.
Outer joins are commutative (1+2 == 2+1) at least barring the left/right
issue. But they are not associative. (1+2)+3 != 1+(2+3).
There are cases where the optimizer could prove a particular set of joins
could be reordered this way, but it doesn't know how to do that currently.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Patrick Welche | 2003-10-13 18:22:34 | gborg cvs ? |
Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2003-10-13 16:06:58 | Re: more on undefined reference to 'pg_detoast_datum' |