Re: Query Optimisation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: psql-mail(at)freeuk(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Query Optimisation
Date: 2003-07-15 16:35:56
Message-ID: 23272.1058286956@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-performance

psql-mail(at)freeuk(dot)com writes:
> -> Seq Scan on message (cost=0.00..25.00 rows=5 width=8) (actual time=
> 58.18..410588.49 rows=20839 loops=1)
> Filter: ((header || body) ~~* '%chicken%'::text)

Estimated cost of a seqscan only 25? Have you ever vacuumed or analyzed
that table? The planner evidently thinks it is tiny ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-07-15 16:40:38 Re: INSTEAD rule bug?
Previous Message David Olbersen 2003-07-15 16:26:15 Re: Reverse compatibility

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vivek Khera 2003-07-15 16:44:37 Re: Tunning FreeeBSD and PostgreSQL
Previous Message Jonathan Bartlett 2003-07-15 16:21:26 Re: Query Optimisation