At Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:30:24 -0700, Craig James wrote
in
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:45 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:40:58PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > > On Postgres 9.6 (config below), I have a case I don't understand: three
> > > tables that can be separately q
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 4:31 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 04:30:24PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:45 PM Justin Pryzby
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:40:58PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > > > On Postgres 9.6 (config below), I have a c
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:45 PM Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:40:58PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> > On Postgres 9.6 (config below), I have a case I don't understand: three
> > tables that can be separately queried in milliseconds, but when put
> > together into one view using
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:40:58PM -0700, Craig James wrote:
> On Postgres 9.6 (config below), I have a case I don't understand: three
> tables that can be separately queried in milliseconds, but when put
> together into one view using UNION, take 150 seconds to query. Here's the
> rough idea (actu
On Postgres 9.6 (config below), I have a case I don't understand: three
tables that can be separately queried in milliseconds, but when put
together into one view using UNION, take 150 seconds to query. Here's the
rough idea (actual details below):
create view thesaurus as
(select id,