Re: Performance of query

Hi,

there is something mixed..

your index is on table1....

Explain Analyze reports about table called: busbase....

Kind Regards,

Misa

2013/3/22 Cindy Makarowsky <cindymakarowsky(at)gmail(dot)com>

> But, I do have an index on Table1 on the state field which is in my group
> by condition:
>
> CREATE INDEX statidx2
> ON table1
> USING btree
> (state COLLATE pg_catalog."default" );
>
> I have vacuumed the table too.
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> On 03/22/2013 12:46 PM, Cindy Makarowsky wrote:
>> > I've tried playing around with the settings in the config file for
>> > shared_buffers, work_mem, etc restarting Postgres each time and nothing
>> > seems to help.
>>
>> Well, you're summarizing 55 million rows on an unindexed table:
>>
>> " -> Seq Scan on busbase (cost=0.00..6378172.28 rows=55402728
>> width=7) (actual time=0.004..250046.673 rows=60057057 loops=1)"
>>
>> ... that's where your time is going.
>>
>> My only suggestion would be to create a composite index which matches
>> the group by condition on table1, and vacuum freeze the whole table so
>> that you can use index-only scan on 9.2.
>>
>> --
>> Josh Berkus
>> PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
>> http://pgexperts.com
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
>> )
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>>
>
>