| From: | Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | bamby(at)marka(dot)net(dot)ua, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] General Bug Report: Bug in optimizer |
| Date: | 1999-03-18 18:58:22 |
| Message-ID: | 36F14CCE.2C06CE07@krs.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> My guess is that the creation of the index updates the table size
> statistics.
Yes.
> However, when I see zero size, I don't know if it is accurate, or if
> someone has added rows since the last vacuum/index creation, so I think
> it is correct to use an index on a zero-length table if it is
> appropriate. If the size is 1, I will assume that number is accurate,
> and do a sequential scan.
>
> Does that make sense?
Yes. But we have to fix SeqScan for field1 = -1...
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-03-18 19:00:20 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] General Bug Report: Bug in optimizer |
| Previous Message | Vadim Mikheev | 1999-03-18 18:56:32 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] General Bug Report: Bug in optimizer |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-03-18 19:00:20 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] General Bug Report: Bug in optimizer |
| Previous Message | Vadim Mikheev | 1999-03-18 18:56:32 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] General Bug Report: Bug in optimizer |