Re: another "EXPLAIN -- NO INDEX?" question
От | Stephan Szabo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: another "EXPLAIN -- NO INDEX?" question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020210103521.A70659-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: another "EXPLAIN -- NO INDEX?" question (will trillich <will@serensoft.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: another "EXPLAIN -- NO INDEX?" question
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Sun, 10 Feb 2002, will trillich wrote: > On Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 11:29:57AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Try 7.2, and don't forget to VACUUM ANALYZE after you've loaded the > > data. > > i'm stuck with 7.1 for now, and i do the vacuum analyze > nightly... any other ideas? > > --------- > > create index hits_by_server on hits(server); > > hits=# explain > hits-# select * from hits where (server = 1 or server = 3); > > NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: > Seq Scan on hits (cost=0.00..8537.01 rows=20205 width=90) > EXPLAIN > > hits=# select count(*) from hits; > count > -------- > 266611 > (1 row) > > hits=# select count(*) from hits where (server=1 or server=3); > count > ------- > 3678 > (1 row) Is there one value that's more common? It's estimating about 6 times as many rows as actually match the condition (and 3 times the =1 or =3 real for even just one of them iirc from the first message).
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: