From: | Vic Ricker <vic(at)ricker(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | SZUCS Gabor <surrano(at)mailbox(dot)hu> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: How do I convice postgres to use an index? |
Date: | 2004-07-20 14:21:37 |
Message-ID: | 40FD2A71.2030104@ricker.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
The plan showed that Postgres did the proper cast on the timestamp. I
think part of the problem is that I need to increase the memory
allocated to effective_cache_size for the optimizer choose the proper
method. (Thanks to Richard Huxton for help.) I've read that if it
doesn't have enough ram, it will forego the index for a sequential
scan.. In my case, that's a very poor decision on the optimizer's
part. Disabling enable_seqscan seems to generally fix the problem but
I'm afraid that it might degrade performance elsewhere. I have
expermiented with the effective_cache_size and some other settings but
haven't had as much luck. I think I need more physical ram. Will try
that soon.
-Vic
SZUCS Gabor wrote:
>re-checked; it's WITHOUT in both version, but it's irrelevant if you give
>the full spec. Well, then maybe it was a difference between 7.2 and 7.3, but
>again, it's irrelevant in your case. Have you tried the typecast?
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Boes | 2004-07-20 14:36:02 | Inherited tables and new fields |
Previous Message | Markus Bertheau | 2004-07-20 14:11:16 | Re: Stored procedures and "pseudo" fields.. |