David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm hoping someone can shed some light on these results.

Not without a lot more detail on how you *got* the results.  What
exactly did you do to force the various plan choices?  (I see some
ridiculous choices of indexscans, for instance, suggesting improper use
of enable_seqscan in some cases.)  And what's the "cache rows" and "disk
rows" stuff, and how do you know that what you were measuring is
actually what you think it is?  I have zero confidence in
Windows-atop-ATA as a platform for measuring disk-related behaviors,
because I don't think you can control or even know what caching is
going on.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to