On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 14:33:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote > "Edoardo Ceccarelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Given a query that HAS to be executed with a seqscan I have noticed an > > increase in time comparing before and after the vacuum. > > This is really hard to believe --- I cannot think of any mechanism that > would result in that effect. Unless the vacuum were flushing the > kernel's disk cache, but the effects of that would only persist for one > scan. You did say that the increased time is repeatable if you do > multiple seqscans after the vacuum? > > regards, tom lane
Yes, I can assure you that was repeatable and has disappeared only after a VACUUM FULL ANALYZE it was something really stable in it's bad behaviour. I am going to make some test soon and I will post here the results. Best Regards Edoardo -- The net spotter (http://expot.it) Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
