Re: performance; disk bad or something?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Marcus Engene <mengpg2(at)engene(dot)se>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: performance; disk bad or something?
Date: 2007-04-06 23:43:50
Message-ID: 29217.1175903030@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Marcus Engene <mengpg2(at)engene(dot)se> writes:
> -> Index Scan using apa_item_common_x1 on apa_item_common aic
> (cost=0.00..4956.68 rows=1174 width=8) (actual time=19.854..9557.606
> rows=1226 loops=1)

If the table only has 12000 rows then it should never have used an index
scan here at all --- a plain seqscan is usually the best bet for
retrieving 10% of a table. Are you using nondefault planner settings?

How big is the table physically (VACUUM VERBOSE output about it might
tell something)?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message filippo 2007-04-06 23:47:08 Re: perl DBI: problems searching text strings with ' symbol (es d'ambrose)
Previous Message Danny E. Armstrong 2007-04-06 23:37:18 Re: YTA Time Zone Question