Re: Asking advice on speeding up a big table

On 4/10/06, felix(at)crowfix(dot)com <felix(at)crowfix(dot)com> wrote:
>
> It is, but it is only 32 msec because the query has already run and
> cached the useful bits. And since I have random values, as soon as I
> look up some new values, they are cached and no longer new.

according to my experiene i would vote for too slow filesystem

> What I was hoping for was some general insight from the EXPLAIN
> ANALYZE, that maybe extra or different indices would help, or if there
> is some better method for finding one row from 100 million. I realize
> I am asking a vague question which probably can't be solved as
> presented.
>

hmm .. perhaps you can try to denormalize the table, and then use
multicolumn indices?

depesz