Hi, all. I've done some further analysis, found a form that works if I split
things over two separate queries (B1 and B2, below) but still trouble when
combining (B, below).
This is the full pseudo-query: SELECT FROM A UNION SELECT FROM B ORDER BY
dateTime DESC LIMIT 50
In that pseudo-query:
Hi. Thanks for your response.
Robert Haas wrote:
Join Filter: ((events_events.transactionid)::text =
(customerdetails.transactionid)::text)
Now why is there a cast to text there on both sides? Do those two
columns have exactly the same datatype? If not, you probably want to
fix that,
Merlin Moncure-2 wrote:
8.3? try converting the above to WHERE EXISTS or (even better) a JOIN...
Thanks for that. But in my Mar 03, 2011; 10:19am post I already broke it
down to the barebones with some variations, among which JOIN. The EXISTS IN
variation was so poor that I left that
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Andy Colson a...@squeakycode.net wrote:
explain analyze SELECT events_events.* FROM events_events
JOIN events_eventdetails customerDetails
ON events_events.transactionid = customerDetails.transactionid
AND customerDetails.keyname='customer_id'
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 6:12 PM, sverhagen sverha...@wps-nl.com wrote:
Thanks for your help already!
Hope you're up for some more :-)
Andy Colson wrote:
First off, excellent detail.
Second, your explain analyze was hard to read... but since you are not
really interested in your posted
Andy Colson wrote:
For your query, I think a join would be the best bet, can we see its
explain analyze?
Here is a few variations:
SELECT events_events.* FROM events_events WHERE transactionid IN (
SELECT transactionid FROM events_eventdetails customerDetails
WHERE
On 3/3/2011 3:19 AM, sverhagen wrote:
Andy Colson wrote:
For your query, I think a join would be the best bet, can we see its
explain analyze?
Here is a few variations:
SELECT events_events.* FROM events_events WHERE transactionid IN (
SELECT transactionid FROM
Thanks for your help already!
Hope you're up for some more :-)
Andy Colson wrote:
First off, excellent detail.
Second, your explain analyze was hard to read... but since you are not
really interested in your posted query, I wont worry about looking at
it... but... have you seen:
On 03/02/2011 06:12 PM, sverhagen wrote:
Thanks for your help already!
Hope you're up for some more :-)
Andy Colson wrote:
First off, excellent detail.
Second, your explain analyze was hard to read... but since you are not
really interested in your posted query, I wont worry about looking
On 03/01/2011 06:14 PM, sverhagen wrote:
Hi, appreciated mailing list. Thanks already for taking your time for my
performance question. Regards, Sander.
===POSTGRESQL VERSION AND ORIGIN===
PostgreSQL 8.3.9 on i486-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 4.2.4
(Ubuntu 4.2.4-1ubuntu3)
Installed
10 matches
Mail list logo
