From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com> |
Cc: | lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Index on timestamp field, and now() |
Date: | 2002-02-11 17:00:30 |
Message-ID: | 7553.1013446830@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com> writes:
> webmailstation=> explain select * from queue where send_date > timestamp
> 'now';
> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:
> Seq Scan on queue (cost=0.00..10114.06 rows=80834 width=190)
> EXPLAIN
> Although exact search uses index scan:
> webmailstation=> explain select * from queue where send_date = timestamp
> 'now';
> NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:
> Index Scan using queue_senddate_key on queue (cost=0.00..5.95 rows=1
> width=190)
> EXPLAIN
The second case proves that it's not a datatype or not-a-constant
problem. I'd guess that the failure of the first case indicates you've
never ANALYZEd the table, and so you're getting a default selectivity
estimate for the inequality operator (which is way too high to allow an
indexscan). If that's not so, what do you get from
select * from pg_stats where tablename = 'queue';
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2002-02-11 17:16:38 | Re: [HACKERS] Feature enhancement request : use of libg |
Previous Message | Jean-Michel POURE | 2002-02-11 16:56:22 | Re: [HACKERS] Feature enhancement request : use of libgda in |