Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- From: markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz
- To: "markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
- Cc: Harry Hehl <Harry(dot)Hehl(at)diskstream(dot)com>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:20:55 +1200 (NZST)
Quoting "markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>: > Hmm - that first query needs to do a sort, so you might want to > experiment with > the sort_mem parameter Oops - I mean work_mem...
- References:
- Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- From: Harry Hehl
- Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- From: markir
- Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- Prev by Date: Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- Next by Date: Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- Previous by thread: Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- Next by thread: Re: Sequencial scan instead of using index
- Indexes: