Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
- Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, George Pavlov <gpavlov(at)mynewplace(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 23:26:08 -0400
- Message-id: <115(dot)1180063568(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm not sure I want to vote for another 10x increase by >> default, though. > Outside of longer analyze times, and slightly more space taken up by the > statistics, what is the downside? Longer plan times --- several of the selfuncs.c routines grovel over all the entries in the pg_statistic row. AFAIK no one's measured the real impact of that, but it could easily be counterproductive for simple queries. regards, tom lane
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- From: Steve Atkins
- Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- References:
- index vs. seq scan choice?
- From: George Pavlov
- Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- From: Alvaro Herrera
- Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- From: Joshua D. Drake
- index vs. seq scan choice?
- Prev by Date: Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- Next by Date: Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- Previous by thread: Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- Next by thread: Re: index vs. seq scan choice?
- Indexes: