| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bill Gribble <grib(at)linuxdevel(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Seq. scan when using comparison operators, why? |
| Date: | 2002-04-08 18:08:49 |
| Message-ID: | 20020408110513.M77664-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 8 Apr 2002, Bill Gribble wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 07:45, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > "Properly" in your opinion. It's more likely that postgres has a better idea
> > of which one is faster...
>
> This seems to be the standard response to any message questioning the
> query planner's strategy.
Perhaps you missed the part of his message where he asks for more
information and gives a short reason why it *might* be choosing
sequence scan?
(quoted from Martijn's message)
"How many rows are there in the table? If you're going to match most of
the table, it's faster to scan the entire table than it is the scan the
index."
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Darren Ferguson | 2002-04-08 18:12:31 | Re: Tcl_CreateSlave error (pg 7.1.2, RH 7.2) |
| Previous Message | Jeffrey W. Baker | 2002-04-08 18:03:09 | Re: more about pg_toast growth |