From: | Ryszard Lach <siaco(at)autograf(dot)pl> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | "select max/count(id)" not using index |
Date: | 2003-12-22 10:39:18 |
Message-ID: | 20031222103918.GA23673@siaco.id.pl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi.
I have a table with 24k records and btree index on column 'id'. Is this
normal, that 'select max(id)' or 'select count(id)' causes a sequential
scan? It takes over 24 seconds (on a pretty fast machine):
=> explain ANALYZE select max(id) from ogloszenia;
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aggregate (cost=3511.05..3511.05 rows=1 width=4) (actual
time=24834.629..24834.629 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on ogloszenia (cost=0.00..3473.04 rows=15204 width=4)
(actual time=0.013..24808.377 rows=16873 loops=1)
Total runtime: 24897.897 ms
Maybe it's caused by a number of varchar fields in this table? However,
'id' column is 'integer' and is primary key.
Clustering table on index created on 'id' makes such a queries
many faster, but they still use a sequential scan.
Richard.
--
"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they
fight you. Then you win." - Mohandas Gandhi.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-12-22 10:56:50 | Re: "select max/count(id)" not using index |
Previous Message | William Yu | 2003-12-19 17:44:17 | Re: why do optimizer parameters have to be set manually? |