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

Re: seq scan instead of index scan

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Karl Larsson <karl(dot)larsson47(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: seq scan instead of index scan
Date: 2009-12-18 01:37:36
Message-ID: dcc563d10912171737g6a0e6e5em43dafe34d32e1fcd@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Karl Larsson <karl(dot)larsson47(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Best bet is to post the real problem, not a semi-representational made
>> up one.  Unless the made up "test case" is truly representative and
>>  recreates the failure pretty much the same was as the original.
>
> I agree at some level but I generally believe other people won't read
> a big mail like that. In this case it might come to a big post from me
> one day soon. :-)

You're on the one mailing list where they will read big posts.  It's
best if you can attach the explain analyze output as an attachment
tho, to keep it's format readable.

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Craig RingerDate: 2009-12-18 02:20:14
Subject: Re: Automatic optimization of IN clauses via INNER JOIN
Previous:From: Karl LarssonDate: 2009-12-18 01:17:18
Subject: Re: seq scan instead of index scan

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