From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Any way to favor index scans, but not bitmap index scans? |
Date: | 2008-07-23 20:27:43 |
Message-ID: | 10265.1216844863@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Francisco Reyes" <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com> writes:
> On 3:37 pm 07/23/08 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> You might be more likely to get a sane plan if you had an index on
>> join_ids.customer_id.
> There is an index in join_ids:
> joinids_customerids_joinid" btree (customer_id, joinid) WITH (fillfactor=98)
[ squint... ] That makes no sense at all; it should certainly have
picked that index and not join_ids_join_id for a scan with a condition
on customer_id. What is the datatype of the customer_id column exactly?
(Actually, if you could show us the whole schema of both these tables,
such as their psql \d descriptions, that would be helpful.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2008-07-23 20:28:46 | Re: [GENERAL] Fragments in tsearch2 headline |
Previous Message | Francisco Reyes | 2008-07-23 20:27:40 | Re: Any way to favor index scans, but not bitmap index scans? |