| From: | "Edoardo Ceccarelli" <eddy(at)axa(dot)it> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Christopher Browne'" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | R: R: slow seqscan after vacuum analize |
| Date: | 2004-02-05 17:00:52 |
| Message-ID: | 2s28b9$l7fca@mailr-1.tiscali.it |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
> But if the Original Poster is encountering that the database
> is doing Seq Scans when it would be better to do an Index
> Scan, that is a separate problem, and focusing on the VACUUM
> may distract from the _real_ problem...
> --
I have only noticed that after a VACUUM ANALYZE of the db the time of a seq scan (when
a seqscan is required) has increased by a factor of ten, this is my primary focus,
otherwise I would have posted something about "my select is really slow ..."
To be more precise:
Given a query that HAS to be executed with a seqscan I have noticed an increase in
time comparing before and after the vacuum.
Anyway I am working to create the same situation again to post some output of the
verbose option of the vacuum.
Edoardo
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Sturm | 2004-02-05 17:08:07 | VACUUM Quesition |
| Previous Message | Andrew Biagioni | 2004-02-05 16:23:34 | Re: R: slow seqscan after vacuum analize |