From: | Sean Shanny <shannyconsulting(at)earthlink(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Marcus Andree S(dot) Magalhaes" <marcus(dot)magalhaes(at)vlinfo(dot)com(dot)br> |
Cc: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: disabling seq scans |
Date: | 2004-04-01 20:36:24 |
Message-ID: | 406C7D48.5080809@earthlink.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
I do the following in several reports I run.....
statement = m_conn.createStatement();
statement.executeUpdate( "set enable_seqscan = false" );
do your thing....
statement.executeUpdate( "set enable_seqscan = true" );
--sean
Marcus Andree S. Magalhaes wrote:
>Hi, guys,
>
>We're experiencing a little problem with one of our queries.
>It isn't using an index specially created for it. When we
>disable seq scans with psql, we can ensure the query finishes
>much faster than without using index, as it should be.
>
>So, whats the best procedure in this case, but when have a
>JDBC based client? Do we mess around with planner
>settings even when all other queries are using the best
>index for them?
>
>Is it safe (but some may find ugly) to issue a command to
>disable seq scanning from the java side?
>
>Since we're using the pooled connection classes that comes
>with the JDBC3 driver, once a connection is got from the pool,
>do we need to explicitly set seq scanning to true? This is
>assuming the later option is the more recommended one...
>
>TIA
>
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2004-04-01 21:11:55 | Re: disabling seq scans |
Previous Message | Marcus Andree S. Magalhaes | 2004-04-01 20:27:22 | disabling seq scans |