From: | Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
Cc: | Postgres general mailing list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: The planner chooses seqscan+sort when there is an |
Date: | 2006-05-04 08:09:33 |
Message-ID: | 1146730172.14093.191.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> > Looks that way to me. You could try setting enable_sort off as well,
> > which will penalize the seqscan+sort plan another 100million cost units.
> > And maybe try reducing random_page_cost to make the indexscan look
> > cheaper. However, if there's a 100million delta between the two plans,
> > I suspect you really really don't want the indexscan anyway ;-)
>
> I imagine the followup post:
>
> So, I've had this query running for six weeks now, and...
Well, I guess that's it then... I will let the query run with the
seqscan+sort. It will still run 1-2 days, yesterday I stopped it after 6
hours ;-) Actually it would be nice to have some kind of feedback on
what is it doing so I can estimate how long it will still take... cause
I'm not sure the seqscan+sort won't run itself for 6 weeks...
Thanks,
Csaba.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-05-04 08:18:17 | Re: The planner chooses seqscan+sort when there is an |
Previous Message | Don Y | 2006-05-04 07:54:09 | Re: ISSTRICT behavior |