Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be so slow?
| От | Alessandro Gagliardi |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be so slow? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAAB3BBJTQq8LR=RNgJepPhZnRNVPV19AMPgWe_22YeCK-wfzUw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be so slow? (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be
so slow?
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
I set random_page_cost to 2 (with enable_seqscan on) and get the same performance I got with enable_seqscan off.
So far so good. Now I just need to figure out how to set it globally. :-/
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes try lowering it. Generally speaking, random page cost shouldOn Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Alessandro Gagliardi
<alessandro@path.com> wrote:
> Looking
> at http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/runtime-config-query.html#GUC-RANDOM-PAGE-COST
> I wonder if I should try reducing random_page_cost?
>
always be >= seq page cost. Start with a number between 1.5 and 2.0
to start with and see if that helps. You can make it "sticky" for
your user or database with alter user or alter database...
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: