Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS

The table has been Vacuumed and seq_scan is turned on.

"Jean-Luc Lachance" <jllachan(at)nsd(dot)ca> wrote in message
news:3F5753B9(dot)F4A5A63F(at)nsd(dot)ca(dot)(dot)(dot)
> You forgot that the original poster's query was:
> SELECT * from <table>
>
> This should require a simple table scan. NO need for stats.
> Either the table has not been properly vacuumed or he's got seq_scan
> off...
>
> JLL
>
>
> Nick Fankhauser wrote:
> >
> > > Yes I Analyze also, but there was no need to because it was a fresh
brand
> > > new database.
> >
> > This apparently wasn't the source of problem since he did an analyze
anyway,
> > but my impression was that a fresh brand new database is exactly the
> > situation where an analyze is needed- ie: a batch of data has just been
> > loaded and stats haven't been collected yet.
> >
> > Am I mistaken?
> >
> > -Nick
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>