Re: Avoiding a seq scan on a table.

From: Alan Hodgson <ahodgson(at)simkin(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Avoiding a seq scan on a table.
Date: 2008-01-14 17:30:30
Message-ID: 200801140930.30967@hal.medialogik.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice

On Monday 14 January 2008, LWATCDR <lwatcdr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Really? From what I have done in writing my own code I have found
> hashing to be faster than a btree but then when I wrote my own hashing
> it was a specific type of key.
> Anyway I put in the tree indexes and I am still getting a seq scan.
>

> Seq Scan on issuetracking (cost=0.00..12.12 rows=1 width=0)

The planner will always choose a seq scan when your table size is very
small.

In response to

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message LWATCDR 2008-01-14 17:35:30 Re: Avoiding a seq scan on a table.
Previous Message Brian Hurt 2008-01-14 17:28:09 Re: Avoiding a seq scan on a table.