| From: | "Jeffrey W(dot) Baker" <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Roderick A(dot) Anderson" <raanders(at)tincan(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Dave Trombley <dtrom(at)bumba(dot)net>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: sequential scans and the like operator |
| Date: | 2002-01-08 21:28:45 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0201081327490.29620-100000@windmill.gghcwest.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Dave Trombley wrote:
>
> > You can always check exaclty what's being done in your queries by
> > using the EXPLAIN command. For example, to test your hypothesis:
> >
>
> >From your example I'm assuming I don't need data to test the optimizer.
> Cool! This is why I asked (and a little laziness) instead of trying it.
> No real data to populate the table with.
>
> Thanks for the idea/knowledge.
Ah, no that actually isn't true. For example, I believe that Pg will
always Seq Scan a table that has never been vacuum analyzed, or is empty,
or has only a few rows.
-jwb
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-08 21:32:12 | Re: sequential scans and the like operator |
| Previous Message | Command Prompt, Inc. | 2002-01-08 20:46:07 | Re: Does Postgres support BLOB datatypes? |