> This line from the EXPLAIN output suggests that the rule is causing a
> seq scan
> to be used instead on an index scan:
>
> ... WHERE ... a.archiveset = new.archiveset AND a.fileid <>
> new.fileid.
>
> When I replace the "new." with actual integers:
>
> ... WHERE ... a.archiveset = 10003 AND a.fileid <> 35352974,
>
> the problem goes away.
>
> That makes me think that the planner is unable to find the index, so
> it instead
> uses a seq scan.
>
I still don't have find any good suggestion.
If the cause by the key word "new" or "old" in the rule, the planner is
confused which index to use.
I think this is should be considered as a bug for rule system related to
planner. I am not sure 9.2 will address this issue.
--
Best regards,
Alex Lai
OMI SIPS DBA ADNET Systems , Inc.
7515 Mission Drive,
Suite A100 Lanham, MD 20706
301-352-4657 (phone)
301-352-0437 (fax)
alai@sesda2.com