> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Matt Nuzum
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 3:35 PM
> To: pgsql-performance
> Subject: [PERFORM] Speeding up this function
>
>
> All it does is try to "link" pageviews together into a session.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Bruce Momjian
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 1:27 PM
> To: Adi Alurkar
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Equivalent praxis to CLUSTERED INDEX?
>
>
>
> But what is the advantage o
Title: Message
One
option that does not take advantage of any fancy indexing methods is to create a
trigger on the table, on insert/update/delete, which extracts each individual
word from the field you care about, and creates an entry in another 'keyword'
table, id = 'word', value = pk of yo
> There's a hard limit of 1000, I believe. Didn't it give you
> a warning saying so?
No warning at 2000, and no warning at 100,000 either!
Remember we are still on 7.2.x. The docs here
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.2/static/sql-altertable.html don't say
anything about a limit.
This is go
> > When I just tried it again with a value of 300, analyze,
> then run the query, I get a *worse* result for an estimate. I don't
understand
> > this.
>
> That's annoying. How repeatable are these results --- if you
> do ANALYZE over again several times, how much does the row
> count estima
> "Jeremy Dunn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The question: why does the planner consider a sequential scan to be
> > better for these top 10 values?
>
> At some point a seqscan *will* be better. In the limit, if
> the key being sought is common enoug
with
VACUUM.
Jeremy Dunn wrote:
> I've searched the archives and can't find an answer to this seemingly
> simple question. Apologies if it's too common.
>
> The table in question has ~1.3M rows. It has 85 columns, 5 of which
> have single-column indexes.
>
Title: Message
I've searched the
archives and can't find an answer to this seemingly simple question.
Apologies if it's too common.
The table in
question has ~1.3M rows. It has 85 columns, 5 of which have single-column
indexes.
The column in
question (CID) has 183 distinct values. Fo
