Re: Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum analyze
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum analyze |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10710.1014868630@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum analyze ("Michael G. Martin" <michael@vpmonline.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
"Michael G. Martin" <michael@vpmonline.com> writes: > Here is what I would expect which usually happens: > explain select * from symbol_data where symbol_name='IBM'; > Index Scan using symbol_data_pkey on symbol_data (cost=0.00..512.99 rows=128 width=129) > Here is one that fails: > explain select * from symbol_data where symbol_name='ELTE'; > Seq Scan on symbol_data (cost=0.00..707415.32 rows=438015 width=129) The planner thinks that there are 438K occurrences of 'ELTE' in your table. If that's true, a sequential scan is not obviously the wrong choice. How many are there, in reality? What do you get from select * from pg_stats where tablename = 'symbol_data' and attname = 'symbol_name'; Also, to put the rubber to the road: if you force an indexscan by doing "set enable_seqscan = off", does it get faster or slower? (EXPLAIN ANALYZE would be useful here.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: