Re: Change in 9.1?
Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak@officenet.no>
From: Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak@officenet.no>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-11-22T11:54:53Z
Lists: pgsql-sql
Attachments
- (unnamed) (text/html)
<p>På tirsdag 22. november 2011 kl 08:39:09 skrev <strong>Jasmin Dizdarevic</strong> <<a href="mailto:jasmin.dizdarevic@gmail.com">jasmin.dizdarevic@gmail.com</a>>:</p> <blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Hi, <div> </div> <div>we have a reporting tool, that sometimes uses this kind of condition.</div> <div>...WHERE a.field = a.field </div> <div> </div> <div>To explain this: a.field can be filtered by the user. the user can choose some values. if he does, this condition will be build:</div> <div>...WHERE a.field IN (1,2,3)</div> <div> </div> <div>If the user doesn't choose any values the * = * condition is used.</div> <div> </div> <div>Since 9.1 we're experiencing problems with this construction. Have there been any changes to the planner regarding this?</div> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p>It would be far easier to give you an answer if you provided a query which worked before which now, in 9.1, gives you trouble.<br /> <br /> <span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: 10px;">--<br /> Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak@officenet.no> - mob: +47 909 56 963<br /> Senior Software Developer / CTO - OfficeNet AS - http://www.officenet.no<br /> Public key: http://home.officenet.no/~andreak/public_key.asc</span></p> <p> </p> >From pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org Tue Nov 22 11:30:06 2011 Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F6201ED23D7 for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:30:04 -0400 (AST) Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <robjsargent@gmail.com>) id 1RSsIN-0006uX-4u for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:30:04 +0000 Received: from in02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.52]) by out02.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <robjsargent@gmail.com>) id 1RSsI9-0003kh-C3; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:29:49 -0700 Received: from [208.187.158.94] (helo=[172.16.1.26]) by in02.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <robjsargent@gmail.com>) id 1RSsI9-0003n0-0C; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:29:49 -0700 Message-ID: <4ECBBFEA.4080005@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:29:46 -0700 From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111101 SUSE/3.1.16 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org References: <CAOveQuPRqy0NoJkNFMRAhkJoWoc8jHSMz8fKdf56Xjzz5Gw27A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOveQuPRqy0NoJkNFMRAhkJoWoc8jHSMz8fKdf56Xjzz5Gw27A@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=208.187.158.94;;;frm=robjsargent@gmail.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1/+Tv6z0cwWjrHYirpICGiYIUKQVtNVexE= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 208.187.158.94 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: robjsargent@gmail.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on sa07.xmission.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=8.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_20, DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,FREEMAIL_FROM,T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG, UNTRUSTED_Relay autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (robjsargent[at]gmail.com) * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -0.0 BAYES_20 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 5 to 20% * [score: 0.1277] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa07 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.2 DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE Envelope sender in abuse.rfc-ignorant.org * 0.4 UNTRUSTED_Relay Comes from a non-trusted relay X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa07 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;pgsql-sql@postgresql.org X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: Re: Change in 9.1? X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:31:04 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) X-Archive-Number: 201111/74 X-Sequence-Number: 36047 On 11/22/2011 12:39 AM, Jasmin Dizdarevic wrote: > Hi, > > we have a reporting tool, that sometimes uses this kind of condition. > ...WHERE a.field = a.field > > To explain this: a.field can be filtered by the user. the user can > choose some values. if he does, this condition will be build: > ...WHERE a.field IN (1,2,3) > > If the user doesn't choose any values the * = * condition is used. > > Since 9.1 we're experiencing problems with this construction. Have > there been any changes to the planner regarding this? > > Ty > Regards, Jasmin If it's a commercial product please name that reporting tool: clearly it's to be avoided. If it's an in-house tool clearly it's broken.