Re: slow seqscan

>>can't understand this policy:
>>
>>dba400=# SELECT count(*) from annuncio400 where rubric='DD';
>> count
>>-------
>> 6753
>>(1 row)
>>
>>dba400=# SELECT count(*) from annuncio400 where rubric='MA';
>> count
>>-------
>> 2165
>>(1 row)
>>
>>so it's using the index on 2000 rows and not for 6000? it's not that
>>big difference, isn't it?
>>
>>
>
>It's a question of how many pages it thinks it's going to have to retrieve
>in order to handle the request. If it say needs (or think it needs) to
>retrieve 50% of the pages, then given a random_page_cost of 4, it's going
>to expect the index scan to be about twice the cost.
>
>Generally speaking one good way to compare is to try the query with
>explain analyze and then change parameters like enable_seqscan and try the
>query with explain analyze again and compare the estimated rows and costs.
>That'll give an idea of how it expects the two versions of the query to
>compare speed wise.
>
>
>
>
Ok then how do you explain this?
just created a copy of the same database

Slow seqscan query executed on dba400

dba400=# explain analyze SELECT *, oid FROM annuncio400 WHERE rubric =
'DD' AND LOWER(testo) Like LOWER('cbr%') OFFSET 0 LIMIT 11;
QUERY
PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Limit (cost=0.00..3116.00 rows=11 width=546) (actual time=46.66..51.40
rows=11 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on annuncio400 (cost=0.00..35490.60 rows=125 width=546)
(actual time=46.66..51.38 rows=12 loops=1)
Filter: ((rubric = 'DD'::bpchar) AND (lower((testo)::text) ~~
'cbr%'::text))
Total runtime: 51.46 msec
(4 rows)

fastest index scan query on dba400b (exact copy of dba400)

dba400b=# explain analyze SELECT *, oid FROM annuncio400 WHERE rubric =
'DD' AND LOWER(testo) Like LOWER('cbr%') OFFSET 0 LIMIT 11;
QUERY
PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Limit (cost=0.00..7058.40 rows=9 width=546) (actual time=1.36..8.18
rows=11 loops=1)
-> Index Scan using rubric on annuncio400 (cost=0.00..7369.42 rows=9
width=546) (actual time=1.35..8.15 rows=12 loops=1)
Index Cond: (rubric = 'DD'::bpchar)
Filter: (lower((testo)::text) ~~ 'cbr%'::text)
Total runtime: 8.28 msec
(5 rows)

anyway, shall I try to lower the random_page value since I get an index
scan? I mean that in my case I've already noted that with index scan
that query get executed in 1/10 of the seqscan speed.

Thank you
Edoardo