I sent this message to the list and although it shows up in the archives, I did not receive a copy of it through the list, so I'm resending as I suspect others did not see it either.
Advertising
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:48:01 -0500 (EST) From: Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Eric Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PERFORM] severe performance issue with planner On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Tom Lane wrote: > "Eric Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [ planning a 9-table query takes too long ] > > See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/explicit-joins.html > for some useful tips. > Is this the best answer we've got? For me with an empty table this query takes 4 seconds to plan, is that the expected planning time? I know I've got nine table queries that don't take that long. Setting geqo_threshold less than 9, it takes 1 second to plan. Does this indicate that geqo_threshold is set too high, or is it a tradeoff between planning time and plan quality? If the planning time is so high because the are a large number of possible join orders, should geqo_threhold be based on the number of possible plans somehow instead of the number of tables involved? Kris Jurka ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
