From: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Wrong index choosen? |
Date: | 2004-07-23 17:41:53 |
Message-ID: | 41014DE1.8000007@bigfoot.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane wrote:
| Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org> writes:
|
|>In this plan it estimates to get 481 but it got 22477. So the estimation
|>was very wrong. You can increase the statistics tarhet on the login_time
|>and it will probably be better (after the next analyze).
|
|
| Given the nature of the data (login times), I'd imagine that the problem
| is simply that he hasn't analyzed recently enough. A bump in stats
| target may not be needed, but he's going to have to re-analyze that
| column often if he wants this sort of query to be estimated accurately,
| because the fraction of entries later than a given time T is *always*
| going to be changing.
Well know that I think about it, I felt my shoulders covered by
pg_autovacuum but looking at the log I see that table never analyzed!
Aaargh.
I already applied the patch for the autovacuum but evidently I have to
make it more aggressive, I'm sorry that I can not made him more aggressive
only for this table.
Thank you all.
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBAU3g7UpzwH2SGd4RAhbEAKDLbKXLGRqphBbfyBh6cu7QoqFQhACfdDtu
cGS0K1UuTuwTDp4P2JjQ30A=
=aepf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2004-07-23 18:12:09 | Re: [HACKERS] Wrong index choosen? |
Previous Message | elein | 2004-07-23 17:40:54 | Re: [DOCS] Tutorial |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2004-07-23 18:12:09 | Re: [HACKERS] Wrong index choosen? |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2004-07-23 17:09:47 | Re: Performance over a LAN |