Re: More correlated (?) index woes

From: bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin(at)geoff(dot)dj>
Cc: Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: More correlated (?) index woes
Date: 2016-03-31 02:02:40
Message-ID: CAGrpgQ8zau=VpUfw48Qkkdvc_8jf-E52aZq3DeFS2KVnQWm6pw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 3:47 AM, Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin(at)geoff(dot)dj> wrote:

> On 28 March 2016 at 20:23, I wrote:
>
>> Table pa has 7522676 rows, 4834042 of which have field1 NULL, so it's
>> absolutely not reasonable to expect this to be an optimal strategy.
>> ​
>>
> It occurred to me that even though the majority of values are NULL, there
> are ​
>
> ​1691 unique values in pa.field1, so I suppose it might seem more
> attractive to the planner than it should do (that's more unique values than
> there are scdate entries).
>
>
Perhaps a partial index like "create index pa_sc_id_pidx on pa (sc_id) with
(fillfactor=100) where field1 IS NULL;" will help?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-03-31 02:20:49 Re: bdr replication
Previous Message Slava Bendersky 2016-03-31 01:38:08 bdr replication