Tom Lane wrote:
Is there another issue here besides that one? I think you were hoping that the hash join would be faster than the alternatives, but the cost estimate says it's a lot slower. Is that actually the case?
The hash join takes less than twenty seconds, the other two joins I killed after five minutes. I can try to collect explain analyze results later today if you'd like.
Kris Jurka -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
