[ please keep the list cc'd for the archives' sake ]
"Gauri Kanekar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> No PG release since 7.3 would have voluntarily planned that query that
>> way. Maybe you were using join_collapse_limit = 1 to force the join
>> order?
> Yes, We have set join_collapse_limit set to 1.
Ah, so really your question is why join_collapse_limit isn't working as
you expect. That code changed quite a bit in 8.2, and the way it works
now is that the critical decision occurs while deciding whether to fold
the cross-join (a sub-problem of size 2) into the top-level join
problem. Which is a decision that's going to be driven by
from_collapse_limit not join_collapse_limit.
So one way you could make it work is to reduce from_collapse_limit to
less than 3, but I suspect you'd find that that has too many bad
consequences for other queries. What's probably best is to write the
problem query like this:
FROM table1 a cross join ( table2 b cross join table3 c )
which will cause join_collapse_limit to be the relevant number at both
steps.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
