Re: [PERFORM] Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

2006-04-01 Thread Tom Lane
Mark Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It is a bit confusing - '(distinct) cardinality' might be a better > heading for their 'cardinality' column! The usual mathematical meaning of "cardinality" is "the number of members in a set". That isn't real helpful for the point at hand, because the

Re: [PERFORM] Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

2006-04-01 Thread Mark Kirkwood
chris smith wrote: It'd be nice if the database developers agreed on what terms meant. http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/myisam-index-statistics.html The SHOW INDEX statement displays a cardinality value based on N/S, where N is the number of rows in the table and S is the average value

Re: [PERFORM] Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

2006-04-01 Thread Alvaro Herrera
chris smith wrote: > I believe postgres (because it's a lot more standards compliant).. but > sheesh - what a difference! > > This week's task - stop reading mysql documentation. You don't _have_ to believe Postgres -- this is stuff taught in any statistics course. -- Alvaro Herrera

Re: [PERFORM] Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

2006-04-01 Thread chris smith
On 4/2/06, chris smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/2/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 11:23:37AM +1000, chris smith wrote: > > > On 4/1/06, Brendan Duddridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Jim, > > > > > > > > I'm not quite sure what you mean by t

Re: [PERFORM] Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

2006-04-01 Thread chris smith
On 4/2/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 11:23:37AM +1000, chris smith wrote: > > On 4/1/06, Brendan Duddridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Jim, > > > > > > I'm not quite sure what you mean by the correlation of category_id? > > > > It means how many disti

Re: [PERFORM] [Solved] Slow performance on Windows .NET and OleDb

2006-04-01 Thread Merlin Moncure
On 3/31/06, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is a blatant thread steal... but here we go... > > Do people have any opinions on the pgsql driver? > I beleive so. I've been using it for a long time with zero problems. > While I don't use many of the exotic features in it, I doubt

Re: [PERFORM] Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

2006-04-01 Thread Brendan Duddridge
Hi Jim, from SELECT * FROM pg_stats WHERE tablename='table' AND attname='category_id' I find correlation on category_product for category_id is 0.643703 Would setting the index on category_id to be clustered help with this? Thanks, __

Re: [PERFORM] Query using SeqScan instead of IndexScan

2006-04-01 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 11:23:37AM +1000, chris smith wrote: > On 4/1/06, Brendan Duddridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > > > I'm not quite sure what you mean by the correlation of category_id? > > It means how many distinct values does it have (at least that's my > understanding of i

Re: [PERFORM] [Solved] Slow performance on Windows .NET and OleDb

2006-04-01 Thread Antoine
On 01/04/06, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is a blatant thread steal... but here we go... > > Do people have any opinions on the pgsql driver? > > It's very nice. ... Thanks for the tips - i'll try a couple of test apps soon. Cheers Antoine -- This is where I should put s