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

Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be so slow?

From: Alessandro Gagliardi <alessandro(at)path(dot)com>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be so slow?
Date: 2012-01-30 21:55:00
Message-ID: CAAB3BBJTQq8LR=RNgJepPhZnRNVPV19AMPgWe_22YeCK-wfzUw@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
I set random_page_cost to 2 (with enable_seqscan on) and get the same
performance I got with enable_seqscan off.
So far so good. Now I just need to figure out how to set it globally. :-/

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Alessandro Gagliardi
> <alessandro(at)path(dot)com> wrote:
> > Looking
> > at
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/runtime-config-query.html#GUC-RANDOM-PAGE-COST
> > I wonder if I should try reducing random_page_cost?
> >
>
> Yes try lowering it.  Generally speaking, random page cost should
> always be >= seq page cost.  Start with a number between 1.5 and 2.0
> to start with and see if that helps.   You can make it "sticky" for
> your user or database with alter user or alter database...
>

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2012-01-30 22:19:16
Subject: Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be so slow?
Previous:From: Alessandro GagliardiDate: 2012-01-30 21:45:35
Subject: Re: Why should such a simple query over indexed columns be so slow?

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