Re:

From: Jeff Cole <cole(dot)jeff(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re:
Date: 2007-03-06 21:47:20
Message-ID: 3FB60C33-F8C7-4E6C-A02C-1D15605C4E96@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


On Mar 6, 2007, at 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> the *actual* average number of rows scanned is 3773. I'm not sure why
> this should be --- is it possible that the distribution of keys in
> symptom_reports is wildly uneven? This could happen if all of the
> physically earlier rows in symptom_reports contain the same small set
> of symptom_ids, but the stats don't seem to indicate such a skew.

Hi Tom, you are correct, the distribution is uneven... In the 13k
symptom_reports rows, there are 105 distinct symptom_ids. But the
first 8k symptom_reports rows only have 10 distinct symptom_ids.
Could this cause the problem and would there be anything I could do
to address it?

Thanks for all your help, I appreciate it.

-Jeff

In response to

  • Re: at 2007-03-06 16:40:53 from Tom Lane

Responses

  • Re: at 2007-03-07 16:37:20 from Tom Lane

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zoolin Lin 2007-03-06 21:49:27 Any advantage to integer vs stored date w. timestamp
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2007-03-06 19:03:36 Re: Automated test-suite for Postgres