The Tuesday 01 March 2011 16:33:51, Tom Lane wrote : > Marc Cousin <cousinm...@gmail.com> writes: > > Le mardi 01 mars 2011 07:20:19, Tom Lane a écrit : > >> It's worth pointing out that the only reason this effect is dominating > >> the runtime is that you don't have any statistics for these toy test > >> tables. If you did, the cycles spent using those entries would dwarf > >> the lookup costs, I think. So it's hard to get excited about doing > >> anything based on this test case --- it's likely the bottleneck would be > >> somewhere else entirely if you'd bothered to load up some data. > > > > Yes, for the same test case, with a bit of data in every partition and > > statistics up to date, planning time goes from 20 seconds to 125ms for > > the 600 children/1000 columns case. Which is of course more than > > acceptable. > > [ scratches head ... ] Actually, I was expecting the runtime to go up > not down. Maybe there's something else strange going on here. > > regards, tom lane
Then, what can I do to help ?
