On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 2:05 AM, Achilleas Mantzios
<ach...@matrix.gatewaynet.com> wrote:
>                                                     ->  Hash Semi Join  
> (cost=2768.00..5671.67 rows=1 width=12) (actual time=39.249..81.025 rows=1876 
> loops=1)
>                                                           Hash Cond: 
> (msold.marinerid = msold2.marinerid)
>                                                           Join Filter: 
> ((msold2.id <> msold.id) AND (msold2.starttime < msold.starttime) AND 
> ((msold.starttime - msold2.endtime) <= '1 year 6 mons'::interval))
>                                                           ->  Seq Scan on 
> marinerstates msold  (cost=0.00..2889.32 rows=4590 width=20) (actual 
> time=0.003..33.964 rows=2625 loops=1)
>                                                                 Filter: 
> (((state)::text = 'Active'::text) AND ((starttime)::date <= 
> '2007-01-11'::date) AND ((COALESCE(endtime, now()))::date >= 
> '2006-07-15'::date))
>                                                           ->  Hash  
> (cost=2251.66..2251.66 rows=41307 width=24) (actual time=39.156..39.156 
> rows=41250 loops=1)
>                                                                 Buckets: 8192 
>  Batches: 1  Memory Usage: 2246kB
>                                                                 ->  Seq Scan 
> on marinerstates msold2  (cost=0.00..2251.66 rows=41307 width=24) (actual 
> time=0.002..24.552 rows=41250 loops=1)
>                                                                       Filter: 
> ((state)::text = 'Active'::text)

Looks like the bad selectivity estimate there is what's killing it.
Not sure I completely understand why 9.0.2 is coming up with such a
bad estimate, though.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

Reply via email to