Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: timestamp indexing
- From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- To: Tobias Brox <tobias(at)nordicbet(dot)com>
- Cc: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: timestamp indexing
- Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 13:57:54 -0400
- Message-id: <24839.1117475874@sss.pgh.pa.us> <text/plain>
Tobias Brox <tobias(at)nordicbet(dot)com> writes: >> What version of PostgreSQL are you using? > Also answered in my follow-up - "not yet pg8" :) Your followup hasn't shown up here yet, but if the query is written like WHERE timestampcol >= now() - interval 'something' then the pre-8.0 planner is not capable of making a good estimate of the selectivity of the WHERE clause. One solution is to fold the timestamp computation to a constant on the client side. regards, tom lane
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: timestamp indexing
- From: Tobias Brox
- Re: timestamp indexing
- References:
- timestamp indexing
- From: Tobias Brox
- Re: timestamp indexing
- From: Michael Fuhr
- Re: timestamp indexing
- From: Tobias Brox
- timestamp indexing
- Prev by Date: Re: Postgresql and xeon.
- Next by Date: Re: poor performance involving a small table
- Previous by thread: Re: timestamp indexing
- Next by thread: Re: timestamp indexing
- Indexes: