Re: Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum analyze

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Michael G(dot) Martin" <michael(at)vpmonline(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum analyze
Date: 2002-02-28 04:40:07
Message-ID: 11037.1014871207@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

I said:
>> symbol_data | symbol_name | 0 | 7 | 152988 |
>> {EBALX,ELTE,LIT,OEX,RESC,BS,ESH,HOC,IBC,IDA} |
>> {0.0183333,0.0173333,0.00166667,0.00166667,0.00166667,0.00133333,0.00133333,0.00133333,0.00133333,0.00133333}
>> | {A,BMO,DBD,FSCHX,IIX,MAS,NSANY,PTEC,SR,UTIL,_^^VPM} | 0.128921
>> (1 row)

> What this says is that in the last ANALYZE, EBALX accounted for 18% of
> the sample, and ELTE for 17%.

Argh, make that 1.8% and 1.7%.

That's still orders of magnitude away from what you say the correct
frequency is, however: 687 out of 20+ million. I'd like to think that
the statistical sampling would be unlikely to make such a large error.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael G. Martin 2002-02-28 04:41:39 Re: Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum analyze
Previous Message Michael G. Martin 2002-02-28 04:32:53 Re: Indexes not always used after inserts/updates/vacuum analyze