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

Re: reducing random_page_cost from 4 to 2 to force index scan

From: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Sok Ann Yap <sokann(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: reducing random_page_cost from 4 to 2 to force index scan
Date: 2011-04-27 07:22:31
Message-ID: BANLkTiknDrghb5MWczB8foL83HVPy=kR5g@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The very first thing to check is effective_cache_size and to set it to
> a reasonable value.
>

The problem there, I think, is that the planner is doing a full join,
instead of a semi-join.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Claudio FreireDate: 2011-04-27 07:23:32
Subject: Re: reducing random_page_cost from 4 to 2 to force index scan
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2011-04-27 01:04:13
Subject: Re: reducing random_page_cost from 4 to 2 to force index scan

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