Does indexing help >= as well as = for integer columns?

From: "TJ O'Donnell" <tjo(at)acm(dot)org>
To: <lists(at)boutiquenumerique(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Does indexing help >= as well as = for integer columns?
Date: 2005-02-01 18:56:45
Message-ID: 2842.209.223.166.104.1107284205.squirrel@gnova.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I have a table of about 5 million rows, 24 columns.
Integer column _c is BTREE indexed (as is _n, _o and 3 others).

This I understand and like:
Explain Analyze Select count(smiles) from structure where _c = 30
Aggregate (cost=105595.11..105595.11 rows=1 width=32) (actual time=17.722..17.724 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Index Scan using "Nc" on structure (cost=0.00..105528.89 rows=26486 width=32) (actual
time=0.098..16.095 rows=734 loops=1)
Index Cond: (_c = 30)
Total runtime: 18.019 ms

This I don't get. Why is an index scan not used? Isn't an index supposed
to help when using > < >= <= too?
Explain Analyze Select count(smiles) from structure where _c >= 30
Aggregate (cost=196033.74..196033.74 rows=1 width=32) (actual time=42133.432..42133.434 rows=1
loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on structure (cost=0.00..191619.56 rows=1765669 width=32) (actual
time=8050.437..42117.062 rows=1569 loops=1)
Filter: (_c >= 30)
Total runtime: 42133.746 ms

TJ

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PFC 2005-02-01 19:26:05 Re: Does indexing help >= as well as = for integer columns?
Previous Message Si Chen 2005-02-01 18:53:11 Re: how to release a transaction lock on a table?