| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Anj Adu" <fotographs(at)gmail(dot)com>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: slow index lookup |
| Date: | 2010-06-23 17:08:08 |
| Message-ID: | 4C21F9280200002500032904@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Anj Adu <fotographs(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The combination index works great. Would adding the combination
> index guarantee that the optimizer will choose that index for
> these kind of queries involving the columns in the combination. I
> verified a couple of times and it picked the right index. Just
> wanted to make sure it does that consistently.
It's cost based -- as long as it thinks that approach will be
faster, it will use it.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rajesh Kumar Mallah | 2010-06-23 17:30:01 | Re: cpu bound postgresql setup. Firstly many thanks for responding. I am concerned because the load averages have increased and users complaining of slowness. I do not change settings frequenly. I was curious if there is any half dead component in th |
| Previous Message | Anj Adu | 2010-06-23 16:59:46 | Re: slow index lookup |