Re: Ok, why isn't it using *this* index?

From: "ADBAAMD" <adba(dot)amdocs(at)bell(dot)ca>
To: "Paul Tomblin" <ptomblin(at)xcski(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Ok, why isn't it using *this* index?
Date: 2001-04-01 21:21:15
Message-ID: 3AC79BCB.4040507@bell.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Paul Tomblin wrote:

> Quoting ADBAAMD (adba(dot)amdocs(at)bell(dot)ca):
>
> Ok, so if I understand you correctly, the fact that about 90% of the
> records have country='USA' and about 9% of the records have
> country='CANADA' means that it's never going to use the index because it
> on average, a query is going to be for USA, and a sequential scan is going
> to be better.
>
> I think I understand now. If this is correct, then doesn't it make sense
> just to drop that index? At least until I get a lot more data from other
> countries?

Probably you are right.

You could also try other index access methods besides the standard
b-tree. I don't know about the situation in pgsql, but in Oracle we
have even an index access method create specifically to serve low
selectivity data: bitmaps.

While I could find a succint description of access methods at
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.0/postgres/indices.html, I
don't know how each of them work exactly, nor if any would be any good
for low selectivity situations. Is there any docs on that?

--
_
/ \ Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra +55 (11) 3040 8913
\ / Amdocs at Bell Canada +1 (514) 786 87 47
X Support Center, São Paulo, Brazil mailto:adbaamd(at)bell(dot)ca
/ \ http://terravista.pt./Enseada/1989/ mailto:leandrod(at)amdocs(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-04-01 21:22:34 Re: another index question
Previous Message Paul Tomblin 2001-04-01 21:11:46 Re: Ok, why isn't it using *this* index?