Ron Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Does running a query only twice really insure that a result is cached? > It seems not to be the case for seq-scans on Linux.
Should work for tables small enough to fit into the shared_buffers arena. I wouldn't necessarily assume it for large tables. Note that what I was really doing was taking the timing measurement again on data cached by the *first* run, so that I would have something that could fairly be compared to the following EXPLAIN ANALYZE --- which of course would likewise be operating on cached data. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match