Re: Bad plan after vacuum analyze

From: Mischa Sandberg <mischa(dot)sandberg(at)telus(dot)net>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bad plan after vacuum analyze
Date: 2005-05-11 21:27:45
Message-ID: 1115846865.428278d135357@webmail.telus.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Quoting Guillaume Smet <guillaume_ml(at)smet(dot)org>:

> Hi,
>
> We have some performances problem on a particular query.
...

I have to say it, this was the best laid-out set of details behind a
problem I've ever seen on this list; I'm going to try live up to it, the
next time I have a problem of my own.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-05-11 21:28:19 Re: Partitioning / Clustering
Previous Message Mischa Sandberg 2005-05-11 21:21:22 Federated PG servers -- Was: Re: [GENERAL] "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL