Re: 9.3 Pre-proposal: Range Merge Join
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-04-16T23:05:15Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Apr 16, 2012, at 1:40 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote: >> See attached SQL for example. The >> Problem statement: slow. Nested loops are the only option, although they >> can benefit from an inner GiST index if available. But if the join is >> happening up in the plan tree somewhere, then it's impossible for any >> index to be available. > Hmm. This sounds like something that Tom's recent work on > parameterized plans ought to have fixed, or if not, it seems closely > related. Not really. It's still going to be a nestloop, and as such not terribly well suited for queries where there are a lot of matchable rows on both sides. The work I've been doing is really about making nestloops usable in cases where join order restrictions formerly prevented it --- but Jeff's complaint has nothing to do with that. (This thought also makes me a bit dubious about the nearby suggestions that more indexes will fix it.) regards, tom lane