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

Re: Bug? 8.0 does not use partial index

From: Palle Girgensohn <girgen(at)pingpong(dot)net>
To: John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bug? 8.0 does not use partial index
Date: 2005-01-14 01:24:31
Message-ID: 7E0FFD6C68B851B2CA429A81@palle.girgensohn.se (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
--On fredag, januari 14, 2005 11.52.38 +1100 John Hansen 
<john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:

>> > Dunno if you're desperate enough to try that ... but it does seem to
>> > work.
>
> if yo're going to hack anyway, then why not just simply tell the planner
> that you know better and that it should use the index, regardles of the
> stats collected?
>
> set enable_seqscan=false;
> <your original query here>;
> set enable_seqscan=true;

yeah, maybe I'll do that, but I stumbled on at least one more complicated 
query that lost performance from disabling seq_scans. it had a union with a 
query that gains performance from disabling seq_scans... heh...

Thanks for your time, guys! I now have some options to move on. I would 
love to see this working better in a future version of postgresql, thought 
;-)

Regards,
Palle


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Michael FuhrDate: 2005-01-14 01:25:13
Subject: Re: Slow PL/pgSQL 8.0.RC5 (7.4.6. 3times faster)
Previous:From: John HansenDate: 2005-01-14 00:52:38
Subject: Re: Bug? 8.0 does not use partial index

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