Re: Cluster vs. non-cluster query planning
От | Nolan Cafferky |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Cluster vs. non-cluster query planning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 445678B1.9050908@rbsinteractive.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Cluster vs. non-cluster query planning (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Cluster vs. non-cluster query planning
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane wrote: >The first-order knob for tuning indexscan vs seqscan costing is >random_page_cost. What have you got that set to? > > This is currently at the default of 4. All of my other planner cost constants are at default values as well. Dropping it to 1 drops the estimated cost by a comparable ratio: Index Scan using orders_status_btree_idx on orders o (cost=1.20..3393.20 rows=7026 width=8) (actual time=0.050..0.314 rows=105 loops=1) Index Cond: (order_statuses_id = $0) InitPlan -> Seq Scan on order_statuses (cost=0.00..1.20 rows=1 width=4) (actual time=0.017..0.025 rows=1 loops=1) Filter: ((id_name)::text = 'new'::text) Total runtime: 0.498 ms But, I'm guessing that random_page_cost = 1 is not a realistic value.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: