From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "amol" <amol(at)mithi(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: nested select query failing |
Date: | 2003-05-20 15:18:26 |
Message-ID: | 29058.1053443906@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"amol" <amol(at)mithi(dot)com> writes:
> explain analyze select attached_info.id from attached_tag_list,
> attached_info
> where
> attached_tag_list.attached_tag = 265
> and
> attached_tag_list.id = attached_info.id
> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:
> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..165349.50 rows=114 width=16) (actual
> time=117.14..8994.60 rows=15 loops=1)
> -> Index Scan using ix_attached_tag_list_id on attached_tag_list
> (cost=0.00..111.13 rows=96 width=12) (actual time=0.12..0.66 rows=15
> loops=1)
> -> Seq Scan on attached_info (cost=0.00..1211.53 rows=33553 width=4)
> (actual time=3.67..197.98 rows=33553 loops=15)
> Total runtime: 8994.92 msec
> - I have already indexed attached_info on id using following query
> CREATE INDEX attached_info_Index_1 ON attached_info(id) ;
Hm. I'd have expected an index scan too. Maybe the two id columns are
not of the same datatype?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Eugene Fokin | 2003-05-20 15:33:48 | Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 |
Previous Message | Victor Yegorov | 2003-05-20 14:07:13 | Re: 7.3.2 vs 7.1.2 |