| From: | Patrick B <patrickbakerbr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Slow index scan - Pgsql 9.2 |
| Date: | 2017-01-10 03:05:16 |
| Message-ID: | CAJNY3ivS6wHWg2O=hi+wMnTTfbEdCS3rbVGSadNSog8TS5ws7A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
>
> 3,581 individual pokes into the heap to confirm tuple visibility and
> apply the deleted filter - that could indeed take a while.
> David J.
I see.. The deleted column is:
deleted boolean
Should I create an index for that? How could I improve this query?
Does it execute as slowly when you run it for a 2nd time?
No, it doesn't. I think it's because of cache?
I would think because of the NOT "deleted" clause. Which is interesting,
> because that's a column which you conveniently didn't include in the
> definition below.
My mistake.
Would an Index be sufficient to solve the problem?
Patrick
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-01-10 03:20:25 | Re: Slow index scan - Pgsql 9.2 |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-01-10 02:34:36 | Re: Slow index scan - Pgsql 9.2 |