Kevin Grittner-5 wrote
> Andrew Dunstan <
> andrew@
> > wrote:
>> On 11/07/2014 12:06 AM, Vlad Arkhipov wrote:
>
>>> I need to rewrite it in the way below to make Postgres use the index.
>>>
>>> select *
>>> from commons.financial_documents fd
>>> where fd.creation_time <= '2011-11-07 10:39:07.2
Kevin Grittner writes:
> On the other hand, why not simply write it as?:
> select *
> from commons.financial_documents fd
> where (fd.creation_time, fd.financial_document_id)
> < ('2011-11-07 10:39:07.285022+08', 100)
> order by fd.creation_time desc
> limit 200
That's the way to d
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 11/07/2014 12:06 AM, Vlad Arkhipov wrote:
>> I need to rewrite it in the way below to make Postgres use the index.
>>
>> select *
>> from commons.financial_documents fd
>> where fd.creation_time <= '2011-11-07 10:39:07.285022+08'
>> and (
>>fd.creation_time < '2011
> Yeah, pgTune is pretty badly out of date. It's been on my TODO list, as
> I'm sure it has been on Greg's.
Yeah. And unfortunately the recommendations it gives have been spreading. Take
a look at the online version:
http://pgtune.leopard.in.ua/
I entered a pretty typical 92GB system, and it r
On 11/07/2014 12:06 AM, Vlad Arkhipov wrote:
It was just a minimal example. The real query looks like this.
select *
from commons.financial_documents fd
where fd.creation_time < '2011-11-07 10:39:07.285022+08'
or (fd.creation_time = '2011-11-07 10:39:07.285022+08' and
fd.financial_document_i
Hi,
thanks for your time and answer. Not treating IS NULL as equality
operator definitely helps me to make more sense out of previous
explains.
--
Best Regard,
Artūras Lapinskas
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 12:23:12PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
=?utf-8?Q?Art=C5=ABras?= Lapinskas writes:
After some
