| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Aditya <aditya(at)grot(dot)org> |
| Cc: | <sfpug(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: optimizing selects on time-series data in Pg |
| Date: | 2003-08-01 18:28:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20030801112639.U56675-100000@megazone.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | sfpug |
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Aditya wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 11:07:41AM -0700, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > > - forced the planner not to use sequential scan and verified that the index
> > > scan was in fact more costly then, here's a somewhat edited transcript (only
> > > for brevity):
> >
> > Hmm, does a two column index on timestamp,virtualhost (or possibly the
> > other way around) help at all when forcing an index scan? I wouldn't
> > guess that it'd help enough, but it might be worth trying.
>
> hm, didn't make a difference (I deleted a bunch of rows this morning to see
> what I could get away with, hence the difference in the total row count):
Does it lower the realtime after a set enable_seqscan=off; (also an
explain analyze would let us see if there's a type difference that causes
it to not want to use the index for the date comparison).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Aditya | 2003-08-01 18:31:10 | Re: optimizing selects on time-series data in Pg |
| Previous Message | Aditya | 2003-08-01 18:25:07 | Re: optimizing selects on time-series data in Pg |