Re: Optimizer bug??

From: Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Ismail Kizir <ikizir(at)tumgazeteler(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Optimizer bug??
Date: 2004-05-24 17:17:34
Message-ID: 40B22E2E.503@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Ismail Kizir wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> 1 .... EXPLAIN SELECT COUNT(*) AS c FROM articletbl WHERE
> ((mydate BETWEEN '2004-04-24' AND '2004-05-24' )
> )
>
> 2 .... EXPLAIN SELECT COUNT(*) AS c FROM articletbl WHERE
> ((mydate = '2004-04-24')
> )
>
> (I ran VACUUM ANALYZE before running those)
>
> mydate is an indexed date column.
> The optimizer optimizes the second query but, it doesn't optimize the first
> one and decides to make a "sequential scan".
> Is this a bug?
> Or may someone explain me the reason?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Ismail Kizir

If 2004-04-24 to 2004-05-24 make up let's say 90% of your data
PostgreSQL will find out that it is cheaper to use a seq scan instead of
an index.

This is not a bug at all - this is normal and desired behaviour ...

Regards,

Hans

--
Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig
Schoengrabern 134, A-2020 Hollabrunn, Austria
Tel: +43/720/10 1234567 or +43/664/233 90 75
www.cybertec.at, www.postgresql.at, kernel.cybertec.at

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ismail Kizir 2004-05-24 17:27:01 Re: Optimizer bug??
Previous Message Ismail Kizir 2004-05-24 16:38:58 Optimizer bug??