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

Re: cluster test

From: Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: cluster test
Date: 2007-05-26 17:12:28
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 12:14:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Curiouser and curiouser.  You still get the indexscan as preferred if
> you EXPLAIN the query after the regression tests complete, right?
> Could you step through cost_seqscan and see how it's arriving at such
> a high value?

Ok... I figured it out... When I was doing the guc patch I modified my script such that it passes settings on the command line to
postmaster. There I changed seq_page_cost. I know that I have removed those
settings on my laptop computer since then but I seem to have copied it here
on my other machine at that time and so it started with a different
seq_page_cost... *blushing*...

Sorry for the noise... Interesting though that it only made a difference to
the cluster test...


In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Michael MeskesDate: 2007-05-27 11:18:35
Subject: Re: ecpg USE_INTEGER_DATETIMES missing in msvc build
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-05-26 16:14:14
Subject: Re: cluster test

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group