This line from the EXPLAIN output suggests that the rule is causing a
seq scan
to be used instead on an index scan:
... WHERE ... a.archiveset = new.archiveset AND a.fileid <>
new.fileid.
When I replace the "new." with actual integers:
... WHERE ... a.archiveset = 10003 AND a.fileid <> 35352974,
the problem goes away.
That makes me think that the planner is unable to find the index, so
it instead
uses a seq scan.
I still don't have find any good suggestion.
If the cause by the key word "new" or "old" in the rule, the planner is
confused which index to use.
I think this is should be considered as a bug for rule system related to
planner. I am not sure 9.2 will address this issue.
--
Best regards,
Alex Lai
OMI SIPS DBA ADNET Systems , Inc.
7515 Mission Drive,
Suite A100 Lanham, MD 20706
301-352-4657 (phone)
301-352-0437 (fax)
a...@sesda2.com
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
