On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Willy-Bas Loos <willy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Sergey Konoplev <gray...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> These are plans of two different queries. Please show the second one >> (where d2, g2, etc are) with secscans off. >> >> > yes, you're right sry for the confusion. > here's the plan with enable_seqscan=off for the same quer as the OP. (same > deal though) > > Aggregate (cost=59704.95..59704.96 rows=1 width=0) (actual > time=41.612..41.613 rows=1 loops=1) > -> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..59701.99 rows=1184 width=0) (actual time= > 40.451..41.591 rows=17 loops=1) > -> Index Scan using g_blok on g2 (cost=0.00..1290.24 rows=494 > width=8) (actual time=40.209..40.472 rows=121 loops=1) > > Index Cond: (k = 1942) > -> Index Scan using d_gid on d2 (cost=0.00..117.62 rows=50 > width=8) (actual time=0.008..0.008 rows=0 loops=121) > Index Cond: (gid = g2.gid) > Total runtime: 41.746 ms > > Cheers, > > WBL > > forgot the list -- "Quality comes from focus and clarity of purpose" -- Mark Shuttleworth
