Re: estimated rows vs. actual rows

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: performance pgsql <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: estimated rows vs. actual rows
Date: 2005-02-13 21:41:09
Message-ID: 200502131341.09811.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Jaime,

> Why is this query using a seq scan rather than a index scan?

Because it thinks a seq scan will be faster.

> i notice
> the diff between the estimated rows and actual rows (almost 2000).

Yes, ANALYZE, and possibly increasing the column stats, should help that.

> Can this affect the query plan? i think this is a problem of
> statistics, am i right? if so, what can be done?

Well, if the estimate was accurate, PG would be even *more* likely to use a
seq scan (more rows).

I think maybe you should establish whether a seq scan actually *is* faster?
Perhaps do SET enable_seqscan = false and then re-run the query a few times?

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2005-02-14 03:18:52 Re: estimated rows vs. actual rows
Previous Message Jaime Casanova 2005-02-13 21:27:45 estimated rows vs. actual rows