Hi tom, I did the test yesterday with an index on the three fields, and with a partial index on organization and status and where is null condition on handled. I saw no modification on query plan. May be I forgot to analyze vacuum after. I will retry tonight.
I use a btree index. Is it the good solution, even with the In clause ? Regards, Bertrand Le mardi 27 octobre 2015, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> a écrit : > Bertrand Paquet <bertrand.paq...@doctolib.fr <javascript:;>> writes: > > We have a slow query. After analyzing, the planner decision seems to be > > discutable : the query is faster when disabling seqscan. See below the > two > > query plan, and an extract from pg_stats. > > > Any idea about what to change to help the planner ? > > Neither one of those plans is very good: you're just hoping that the > Filter condition will let a tuple through sooner rather than later. > > If you care about the performance of this type of query, I'd consider > creating an index on (organization_id, status, handled_by) so that all > the conditions can be checked in the index. > > regards, tom lane >
