Shoaib Burq (VPAC) schrieb:
Hi everybody,
One of our clients was using SQL-Server and decided to switch to
PostgreSQL 8.0.1.
Hardware: Dual processor Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.40GHz
OS: Enterprise Linux with 2.6.9-5 SMP kernel
Filesystem: ext3
SHMMAX: $ cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax
6442450944 <--- b
Tom Lane wrote:
Reducing random_page_cost is usually the best way to get the planner to
favor indexscans more.
Ok, I tried a bit with random_page_cost and I have set it to 1 to become
PG using the index on mitpln:
CIMSOFT=# ANALYSE mitpln;
ANALYZE
CIMSOFT=# SET random_page_cost=2;
SET
CIMSOFT=#
Hi List,
i have a query plan who is bad with standard cpu_tuple_costs and good if
I raise cpu_tuple_costs. Is it is a good practice to raise them if i
want to force postgres to use indexes more often? Or is it is better to
disable sequence scans?
CIMSOFT=# ANALYSE mitpln;
ANALYZE
CIMSOFT=# EXPL
I have forgotten this :
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION date_to_yearmonth_dec(TIMESTAMP) RETURNS
VARCHAR AS'
BEGIN
RETURN extract(year FROM $1) || extract(month FROM $1)-1;
END'LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE;
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will
