On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 08:34:47PM -0600, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> * Dave Edmondson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010219 14:40]:
> > > > yes. I ran VACUUM ANALYZE after creating the indicies. (Actually, I VACUUM
> > > > the database twice a day.) The data table literally ha
> > yes. I ran VACUUM ANALYZE after creating the indicies. (Actually, I VACUUM
> > the database twice a day.) The data table literally has 145972 rows, and
> > 145971 will match conf_id 4...
>
> Hm. In that case the seqscan on data looks pretty reasonable ... not
> sure if you can improve on thi
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 12:22:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Edmondson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ack! I just timed it at 74 seconds.
> > Added two indexes, here's the query plan... it doesn't seem to be using the
> > indexes at all. I'm sure I
Ack! I just timed it at 74 seconds.
Added two indexes, here's the query plan... it doesn't seem to be using the
indexes at all. I'm sure I'm doing something wrong here...
NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:
Sort (cost=6707.62..6707.62 rows=10596 width=170)
-> Merge Join (cost=1.34..5492.29 rows=10596 wid
I'm having a problem here. I'm using Postgres 7.0.3 on a FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE
machine... it's a Pentium II/450 w/ 128MB of RAM (not nearly enough, but
there'll be an upgrade soon). Anyway, I have a data table, which currently
has around 146,000 entries, though it will grow to a few million eventual
