Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer Question/Suggestion - numbers after

2002-11-02 Thread Philip Warner
At 07:39 PM 2/11/2002 +1100, Philip Warner wrote:

To give some numbers:


And some more numbers, directly after a vacuum and analyze:

mail=# explain analyze select * from often_updated where id between 
'-1' and '10';
Index Scan using barnet_users_id on often_updated  (cost=0.00..3095.66 
rows=750 width=205) (actual time=0.15..41.04 rows=750 loops=1)
Total runtime: 44.81 msec

mail=# explain analyze select * from often_updated;
Seq Scan on often_updated  (cost=0.00..49273.50 rows=750 width=205) (actual 
time=1.93..1710.01 rows=750 loops=1)
Total runtime: 1714.32 msec

The latter time is actually quote good; when the machine is more heavily 
loaded it goes up to 1ms.

We currently vacuum/analyze daily, and analyze hourly.



Philip Warner| __---_
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |/   -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)  |  /()   __---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _  \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au  |/   \|
 |----
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] Optimizer Question/Suggestion - numbers after

2002-11-02 Thread Doug McNaught
Philip Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 At 07:39 PM 2/11/2002 +1100, Philip Warner wrote:

 The latter time is actually quote good; when the machine is more
 heavily loaded it goes up to 1ms.
 
 We currently vacuum/analyze daily, and analyze hourly.

Why not vacuum hourly (regular non-blocking vacuum, not FULL)?

-Doug

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster