Re: estimated rows vs. actual rows

From: Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: performance pgsql <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: estimated rows vs. actual rows
Date: 2005-02-14 03:18:52
Message-ID: c2d9e70e05021319182db34831@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:41:09 -0800, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Jaime,
>
> > Why is this query using a seq scan rather than a index scan?
>
> Because it thinks a seq scan will be faster.
>
I will suggest him to probe with seq scans disabled.

But, IMHO, if the table has 143902 and it thinks will retrieve 2610
(almost 1.81% of the total). it won't be faster with an index?

i know, i will suggest him to probe to be sure. just an opinion.

regards,
Jaime Casanova

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-02-14 03:38:01 Re: estimated rows vs. actual rows
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-02-13 21:41:09 Re: estimated rows vs. actual rows