Re: index not used?
От | Gaetano Mendola |
---|---|
Тема | Re: index not used? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 417A1E88.7080800@bigfoot.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | index not used? (Dan Pelleg <daniel+pgsql@pelleg.org>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Scott Marlowe wrote: | On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 17:11, Gaetano Mendola wrote: | |>Scott Marlowe wrote: |> |>>On Wed, 2004-10-20 at 08:06, Dan Pelleg wrote: |>> |>> |>>>I'm trying to access a table with about 120M rows. It's a vertical version |>>>of a table with 360 or so columns. The new columns are: original item col, |>>>original item row, and the value. |>>> |>>>I created an index: |>>> |>>>CREATE INDEX idx on table (col, row) |>>> |>>>however, selects are still very slow. It seems it still needs a sequential |>>>scan: |>>> |>>>EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM table WHERE col=1 AND row=10; |>>> QUERY PLAN |>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |>>>Seq Scan on table (cost=100000000.00..102612533.00 rows=1 width=14) |>>> Filter: ((col = 1) AND ("row" = 10)) |>>> |>>>What am I doing wrong? |>> |>> |>>What type are row and col? If they're bigint (i.e. not int / int4) then |>>you might need to quote the value to get the query to use an index: |>> |>>SELECT * FROM table WHERE col='1' AND row='10'; |>> |>>also, have you vacuumed / analyzed the table? I'm assuming yes. |> |>I assume not, seen that cost... |> | | | Actually, that cost would likely be caused by set enable_seqscan = off | wouldn't it? That's true. This is the second time in these last days that I see someone "tune" postgres setting enable_seqscan = off. G. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBeh6H7UpzwH2SGd4RAvEDAKDdBI6g484jxv4dzdMwXSRwQpJUhgCfU2W7 4hghwH7rJhsC8mRk+Uo/OsU= =WCBg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: