Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?

From: Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?
Date: 2004-08-30 19:21:26
Message-ID: opsdj710chcq72hf@musicbox
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>> Also, count(*) is likely to always generate a seq scan due to the way
>> aggregates are implemented currently in pgsql. you might want to try:

By the way, in an ideal world, count(*) should only read the index on the
timetamp column, not the rows. I guess this is not the case. Would this be
an useful optimization ?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud 2004-08-30 19:32:28 Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2004-08-30 19:18:05 Re: seqscan instead of index scan