Re: PG8.2.1 choosing slow seqscan over idx scan

[Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>]

On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 10:28, Jeremy Haile wrote:
> > That's about 32% dead rows.  Might be worth scheduling a vacuum full,
> > but it's not like I was afraid it might be.  It looks to me like you
> > could probably use a faster I/O subsystem in that machine though.
> 
> I'll try to schedule a full vacuum tonight.  As far as I/O - it's using
> SAN over fiber.  Not as fast as internal SCSI though...

Also, look at the thread going by about index bloat by 4x.  You'll
likely want to reindex after a vacuum full since vacuum full doesn't
reclaim space in indexes and in fact often bloats indexes.