Martin Nickel wrote:
Subject:      Re: Sequential scan on FK join
From:         Martin Nickel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups:   pgsql.performance
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 2005 15:53:35 -0500

Richard, here's the EXPLAIN ANALYZE.  I see your point re: the 2.7M
expected vs the 2 actual, but I've run ANALYZE on the lead table and it
hasn't changed the plan.  Suggestions?

Hash Join (cost=62.13..2001702.55 rows=2711552 width=20) (actual time=40.659..244709.315 rows=2 125270 loops=1)
Hmm - is that not just a formatting gap there? Is it not 2,125,270 rows matching which would suggest PG is getting it more right than wrong.

Try issuing "SET enable_seqscan=false" before running the explain analyse - that will force the planner to use any indexes it can find and should show us whether the index would help.
  Richard Huxton
  Archonet Ltd

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to