Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: postgres 7.4 at 100%

From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
To: Chris Cheston <ccheston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>,pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgres 7.4 at 100%
Date: 2004-06-29 13:28:13
Message-ID: 20040629132813.GA28041@wolff.to (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 01:37:30 -0700,
  Chris Cheston <ccheston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> ok i just vacuumed it and it's taking slightly longer now to execute
> (only about 8 ms longer, to around 701 ms).
> 
> Not using indexes for calllogs(from)... should I?  The values for
> calllogs(from) are not unique (sorry if I'm misunderstanding your
> point).

If you are hoping for some other plan than a sequential scan through
all of the records you are going to need an index. You can have an
index on a column (or function) that isn't unique for all rows.

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Bruno Wolff IIIDate: 2004-06-29 13:44:06
Subject: Re: no index-usage on aggregate-functions?
Previous:From: Michal TáborskýDate: 2004-06-29 12:30:30
Subject: Slow INSERT

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group