| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "George Pavlov" <gpavlov(at)mynewplace(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: index vs. seq scan choice? |
| Date: | 2007-05-25 01:08:11 |
| Message-ID: | 27828.1180055291@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-www |
"George Pavlov" <gpavlov(at)mynewplace(dot)com> writes:
> I am curious what could make the PA query to ignore the index. What are
> the specific stats that are being used to make this decision?
The frequency of the specific value being searched for, and the overall
order-correlation of the column. Since the latter is not dependent on a
particular value, my guess at the reason for the inconsistent results is
that you don't have the column's statistics target set high enough to
track all the interesting values --- or maybe just not high enough to
acquire sufficiently accurate frequency estimates for them. Take a look
at the pg_stats row for the column ...
(The default statistics target is 10, which is widely considered too
low --- you might find 100 more suitable.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Ribe | 2007-05-25 01:15:49 | Uhm, so, yeah, speaking of /. |
| Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2007-05-25 00:39:11 | Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-05-25 02:39:22 | Re: index vs. seq scan choice? |
| Previous Message | George Pavlov | 2007-05-24 23:15:54 | index vs. seq scan choice? |