On 24 May 2004, at 14:37, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dan Field <dof(at)llgc(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
>> I have a similar problem with just one of my queries (although it
>> a sub select):
> You really ought to vacuum and/or analyze occasionally. The EXPLAIN
> results show that the planner hasn't got any non-default statistics
> for any of these tables.
Wow, thanks for that. I'd been pulling my hair out for a couple of days
wondering where I was going wrong.
I went from 45 second queries down to sub second query lengths after a
simple vacuum full analyze.
I've now added nightly and monthly cron jobs to do this for me in
Out of curiosity, why is this deemed a DBA task rather than an
automated postgres task?
Once again, many thanks.
Dan Field <dof(at)llgc(dot)org(dot)uk> - Support Programmer: Cymru ar y we
In response to
pgsql-sql by date
|Next:||From: Gaetano Mendola||Date: 2004-05-26 16:29:42|
|Subject: Re: Memory usage on subselect|
|Previous:||From: Manuel Sugawara||Date: 2004-05-26 15:20:50|
|Subject: Re: trigger function building|