Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Creating the following index had no effect on performance!
create unique index i1 on CNX_DS2_53_SIS_STU_OPT_FEE_TB (RT_REC_KEY,
cnxarraycolumn, CRC);
What does EXPLAIN ANALYZE have to say about the query? If you set
enable_seqscan = 0, does the explain
Added -general list so that the next followup can remove -hackers and everyone
there will have had notice.
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Dann Corbit wrote:
I have a query using two postgres tables.
One is called CNX_DS_53_SIS_STU_OPT_FEE_TB and the other is called
CNX_DS2_53_SIS_STU_OPT_FEE_TB.
-Original Message-
From: Nigel J. Andrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 4:58 PM
To: Dann Corbit
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] I feel the need for speed. What am I
doing wrong?
Added -general list so that the next
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
select a.RT_REC_KEY, a.cnxarraycolumn, a.CRC from
CNX_DS_53_SIS_STU_OPT_FEE_TB a left outer join
CNX_DS2_53_SIS_STU_OPT_FEE_TB b on ( a.RT_REC_KEY = b.RT_REC_KEY
and a.cnxarraycolumn = b.cnxarraycolumn) where b.oid is null ;
I suspect you get no
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 5:26 PM
To: Nigel J. Andrews
Cc: Dann Corbit; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] I feel the need for speed. What am I
doing wrong?
Nigel J. Andrews [EMAIL
Dann Corbit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yikes! Five times slower! But then I took Tom's incredibly helpful
suggestion to disable the sequential scan:
Ideally, you shouldn't have to do that. Now that you have the correct
indexes in place, could you show us the EXPLAIN ANALYZE output for both
