Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE

From: Michael Loftis <mloftis(at)wgops(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE
Date: 2002-04-17 15:11:18
Message-ID: 3CBD9096.1060203@wgops.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Y'all are having entirely too much fun with this :P

Though the headling ...
'PostgreSQL with its proprietary bitch-rant-rating query planner storms
the DB front.'

does have a certain...entertainment value.

Thomas Lockhart wrote:

>...
>
>>Weighing these factors, perhaps once we get one or two complaining about
>>postgresql using an index vs 20 complaining about not using an index, then
>>the optimizer values have reached a good compromise :). But maybe the ratio
>>should be 1 vs 100?
>>
>
>:)
>
>So we should work on collecting those statistics, rather than statistics
>on data. What do you think Tom; should we work on a "mailing list based
>planner" which adjusts numbers from, say, a web site? That is just too
>funny :)))
>
> - Thomas
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-04-17 15:16:16 Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2002-04-17 15:09:27 Re: Implicit coercions need to be reined in