Hi, You asked the very same question yesterday, and I believe you got some useful answers. Why do you post the question again?
You don't even mention your previous post, and you didn't continue the thread which you started yesterday. Did you try out any of the suggestions which you got yesterday? Do you have further questions about, for instance, how to do casting of values? If so, please continue posting with the previous thread, rather than reposting the same question with a different subject. regards, --Tim -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Igor Artimenko Sent: dinsdag 17 augustus 2004 16:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PERFORM] I could not get postgres to utilizy indexes Hi verybody! I can't make use of indexes even I tried the same test by changing different settings in postgres.conf like geqo to off/on & geqo related parameters, enable_seqscan off/on & so on. Result is the same. Here is test itself: I've created simplest table test and executed the same statement "explain analyze select id from test where id = 50000;" Few times I added 100,000 records, applied vacuum full; and issued above explain command. Postgres uses sequential scan instead of index one. Of cause Time to execute the same statement constantly grows. In my mind index should not allow time to grow so much. Why Postgres does not utilizes primary unique index? What I'm missing? It continue growing even there are 1,200,000 records. It should at least start using index at some point. Details are below: 100,000 records: QUERY PLAN ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seq Scan on test (cost=0.00..2427.00 rows=2 width=8) (actual time=99.626..199.835 rows=1 loops=1) Filter: (id = 50000) Total runtime: 199.990 ms 200,000 records: QUERY PLAN ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seq Scan on test (cost=0.00..4853.00 rows=2 width=8) (actual time=100.389..402.770 rows=1 loops=1) Filter: (id = 50000) Total runtime: 402.926 ms 300,000 records: QUERY PLAN ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seq Scan on test (cost=0.00..7280.00 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=100.563..616.064 rows=1 loops=1) Filter: (id = 50000) Total runtime: 616.224 ms (3 rows) I've created test table by script: CREATE TABLE test ( id int8 NOT NULL DEFAULT nextval('next_id_seq'::text) INIQUE, description char(50), CONSTRAINT users_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id) ); CREATE SEQUENCE next_id_seq INCREMENT 1 MINVALUE 1 MAXVALUE 10000000000 START 1 CACHE 5 CYCLE; I use postgres 7.4.2 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
