Re: Index not used on group by

Здравствуйте Richard,

Tuesday, September 27, 2005, 1:48:15 PM, Вы писали:

RH> Andrey Repko wrote:
>>
>> I have table ma_data, that contain above 300000 rows.
>> This table has primary key id, and field alias_id.
>> I create index (btree)on this field.
>> Set statistic:
>>
>> ALTER TABLE "public"."ma_data"
>> ALTER COLUMN "alias_id" SET STATISTICS 998;
>>
>> So, when I do something like
>> SELECT alias_id FROM ma_data GROUP BY alias_id

RH> Why are you using GROUP BY without any aggregate functions?

RH> What happens if you use something like
RH> SELECT DISTINCT alias_id FROM ma_data;
sart_ma=# EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT DISTINCT alias_id FROM ma_data;
QUERY PLAN

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unique (cost=65262.63..66770.75 rows=32 width=4) (actual time=16780.214..18250.761 rows=32 loops=1)
-> Sort (cost=65262.63..66016.69 rows=301624 width=4) (actual time=16780.204..17255.129 rows=301624 loops=1)
Sort Key: alias_id
-> Seq Scan on ma_data (cost=0.00..37811.24 rows=301624 width=4) (actual time=6.896..15321.023 rows=301624 loops=1)
Total runtime: 18292.542 ms
(5 rows)

sart_ma=# EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT alias_id FROM ma_data GROUP BY alias_id;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HashAggregate (cost=38565.30..38565.62 rows=32 width=4) (actual time=15990.863..15990.933 rows=32 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on ma_data (cost=0.00..37811.24 rows=301624 width=4) (actual time=3.446..14572.141 rows=301624 loops=1)
Total runtime: 15991.244 ms
(3 rows)

--
С наилучшими пожеланиями,
Репко Андрей Владимирович mailto:repko(at)sart(dot)must-ipra(dot)com