Re: Seq. scan when using comparison operators, why? [netaktiv.com #150]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer(at)netaktiv(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Seq. scan when using comparison operators, why? [netaktiv.com #150]
Date: 2002-04-08 14:26:30
Message-ID: 20548.1018275990@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer(at)netaktiv(dot)com> writes:
> You're right, after the VACUUM ANALYZE, both queries use sequential
> scan :-)

Try it with a bigger table ;-). On a toy-size table the planner doesn't
see any reason to bother with an index at all; the index cannot save any
disk fetches when there's only one or two disk pages in the table anyway
...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Gibson 2002-04-08 14:34:01 Help with pg_hba.conf file
Previous Message Stephane Bortzmeyer 2002-04-08 14:19:02 Re: Seq. scan when using comparison operators, why? [netaktiv.com #150]