Re: [PGSQL 8.3.5] Use of a partial indexes

From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Reg Me Please" <regmeplease(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Scott Ribe" <scott_ribe(at)killerbytes(dot)com>, "Gauthier, Dave" <dave(dot)gauthier(at)intel(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PGSQL 8.3.5] Use of a partial indexes
Date: 2008-12-30 14:12:33
Message-ID: dcc563d10812300612m5d02e4baqf9c8f40266fa4875@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Reg Me Please <regmeplease(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Only one question remains in my mind:
>
> why the planner is not using the partial index?
>
> The partial index is covering 2 predicates out of the 3 used in the where
> condition. Actually there is a boolean flag (to exclude "disabled" rows),
> a timestamp (for row age) and an int8 (a FK to another table).
> The first two are in the partial index in order to exclude "disabled" and
> older rows. The int8 is the "random" key I mentioned earlier.
>
> So the WHERE condition reads like:
>
> flag AND tstz >= '2008-01-01'::timestamptz and thekey=42
>
> I can see in the EXPLAIN that there is no mention to the partial index.
> Please keep in mind that the table has 8+M rows, few of which are flagged,
> about 70% don't match the age limit and few dozens match the key.
> In my opinion the partial index should help a lot.

Can you show us the DDL for the index creation and the select query as well?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message justin 2008-12-30 14:18:36 Re: [PGSQL 8.3.5] Use of a partial indexes
Previous Message Bhujbal, Santosh 2008-12-30 12:28:38 postgres block_size problem