From: | Bert <biertie(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Виктор Егоров <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: query doesn't always follow 'correct' path.. |
Date: | 2013-02-18 15:34:46 |
Message-ID: | CAFCtE1kgqV8n7mb6dWk4HHv6psAxu4H5-xmkhKrzaFDwDqks1g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Hello,
there were 3 hours in between the 2 queries. so I guess new data was loaded
already. new data is being loaded with that etl_run_id.
wkr,
Bert
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Виктор Егоров <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2013/2/18 Bert <biertie(at)gmail(dot)com>
>
>> When I don't touch the indexscan setting I get the following output:
>> Total query runtime: 611484 ms.
>> 20359 rows retrieved.
>> and the following plan: http://explain.depesz.com/s/sDy
>>
>> However, when I put set enable_indexscan=off; in fron of the same query I
>> get the following output:
>> Total query runtime: 16281 ms.
>> 20599 rows retrieved.
>> and the followign plan: http://explain.depesz.com/s/EpP
>>
>
> Is this a typo or do you really get different number of rows returned with
> and without indexscans?
> Is this expected for the same query to return different sets over time?
>
>
> --
> Victor Y. Yegorov
>
--
Bert Desmet
0477/305361
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sergey Konoplev | 2013-02-20 06:17:54 | Re: Volatile functions in WITH |
Previous Message | Julien Cigar | 2013-02-18 15:28:58 | Re: query doesn't always follow 'correct' path.. |