| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | charavay <c(dot)charavay(at)ibcp(dot)fr> |
| Subject: | Re: Indexes performance |
| Date: | 2004-10-18 19:45:10 |
| Message-ID: | 200410181245.10810.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Charavay,
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------- Hash Join (cost=6793.29..1716853.80 rows=33743101 width=11)
> Hash Cond: ("outer"."index" = "inner"."index")
> -> Seq Scan on lnk (cost=0.00..535920.00 rows=33743100 width=15)
> -> Hash (cost=4994.83..4994.83 rows=303783 width=4)
> -> Seq Scan dic (cost=0.00..4994.83 rows=303783 width=4)
> (5 rows)
According to the estimate, you are selecting all of the rows in the database.
This is going to require a Seq Scan no matter what.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2004-10-18 20:36:19 | Re: Getting rid of AtEOXact Buffers (was Re: [Testperf-general] |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2004-10-18 19:37:43 | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |