Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > However, if I increase the generate_series to create 349 rows (or > more) instead, it works.
> I don't fully understand why this attempt I tried to do that is > working the way it does though. Check where the plan goes from a table scan to an indexed access. Also look at what is showing for SIRead locks in pg_locks as you go. Between those two bits of information, it should become apparent. > I don't think Vlad is being unreasonable here; he's provided a > test case demonstrating the behavior he'd like to see, and shown > it doesn't work as expected. ... on a toy table with contrived values. How different is this from the often-asked question about why a query against a four-line table is not using the index they expect, and how can we expect it to scale if it doesn't? I agree that it's not unreasonable for someone to ask either question. If my response falls short, I'm game to try again. -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
