Sebastian Hennebrueder wrote:
> I found a solution to improve my query. I do not know why but the
> statistics for all column has been 0.
> I changed this to 10 for index columns and to 20 for all foreign key
> columns.
> and to 100 for foreign key columns.
> I set the random page cost to 2
> and
I found a solution to improve my query. I do not know why but the
statistics for all column has been 0.
I changed this to 10 for index columns and to 20 for all foreign key
columns.
and to 100 for foreign key columns.
I set the random page cost to 2
and now the query runs as expected.
Many thank
Greg Stark wrote:
Sebastian Hennebrueder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
...
"Nested Loop (cost=1349.13..1435.29 rows=1 width=2541) (actual
time=1640.000..3687.000 rows=62 loops=1)"
" Join Filter: ("inner".fid = "outer".faufgaben_id)"
" -> Ind
Sebastian Hennebrueder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
> ...
>
> "Nested Loop (cost=1349.13..1435.29 rows=1 width=2541) (actual
> time=1640.000..3687.000 rows=62 loops=1)"
> " Join Filter: ("inner".fid = "outer".faufgaben_id)"
> " -> Inde
Solution not found as I thought. I integrated the query in a view and
the query plan became very bad once again.
The reason is that when I am using the view I have the joins in a
differerent order.
Does anyone have an idea to solve this.
Sebastian
a) bad order but the one I have in my applicatio
Solution to my problem.
I added indexes to each foreign_key (there had been some missing). I
will try tomorrow by daylight what influence this had actually. Only the
indexes did not change anything! Even with lower random_page_costs and
higher shared mem.
The big change was the following
I created
