Reading the docs and the mailing lists, I had gathered that postgres favours
smaller indices during query optimization as compared to smaller ones.
However, I do not see that behaviour and would like to know if I am
misinterpreting how postgres processes the queries.
I have a very simple setup. I have one table with ~65000 tuples consuming
~8500 pages (reltuples and relpages as per pg_class). I have defined two
indices on table, t1_id1 which indexes "t1(id1)" which consumes 194 pages;
and t1_id1_v1 which indexes "t1(id1) where id1=9999" which consumes 4 pages.
When I run an "explain select * from t1 where id1=9999;" it chooses to
index-scan the t1_id1 index instead of t1_id1_v1 index, even though that the
where-clause uses an equal comparison and there is a smaller index defined
on t1 limited to the value of id1 to 9999.
My database is running on an x86_64 dual-processor platform with about 1G
given to postgres as shared memory and sequential-scan turned off. I have
already run an "analyze verbose" on the table.
pgsql-novice by date
|Next:||From: Ramon Orticio||Date: 2005-12-23 02:52:49|
|Subject: 2 Questions|
|Previous:||From: operationsengineer1||Date: 2005-12-22 18:59:39|
|Subject: Re: Tsearch 2, index in different table?|