Re: index vs seqscan question
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: index vs seqscan question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 28753.1038004241@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: index vs seqscan question (Frank Bax <fbax@sympatico.ca>) |
Ответы |
Re: index vs seqscan question
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Frank Bax <fbax@sympatico.ca> writes: > OK, I should have finished testing my changes before posting - the > new/faster query should have brackets around (typ=' ' OR typ='A'), but its > still fast as lightning! I don't think it made a big difference to explain > results, but it appears seqscan is cheaper than it was before? The version with the typo couldn't use an indexscan, I think (planner's not real smart about asymmetrical AND/OR structures). The fixed version is probably going for seqscan because with the additional AND condition, it's estimating fewer rows need to be sorted. The seqscan isn't getting cheaper, but the sort is. Looking only at the planner's estimates is not very reliable though. What does EXPLAIN ANALYZE have to say? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: