Re: [HACKERS] Index Puzzle for you
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Index Puzzle for you |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3226.946446552@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Index Puzzle for you (Kristofer Munn <kmunn@munn.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Index Puzzle for you
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Kristofer Munn <kmunn@munn.com> writes: > [ why does the second example not use an index? ] > mail=> explain select 1 from tblissuearticle where ixissue = 7 > and ixarticle = 9; > Index Scan using tblissuearticle_idx1 on tblissuearticle > (cost=228.04 rows=1 width=0) > mail=> explain select 1 from tblissuearticle where ixissue = 7; > Seq Scan on tblissuearticle (cost=4076.63 rows=76338 width=0) The thing that jumps out at me from this example is the much larger estimate of returned rows in the second case. The planner is clearly estimating that "ixissue = 7" alone is not very selective. That might or might not be reasonable (how many rows are in the table, and what's the actual distribution of ixissue values?), but if it is reasonable then a sequential scan might indeed be the right choice. Index scans are not always better than sequential scans --- the planner's job would be far simpler if they were ;-) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: