Re: More correlated (?) index woes

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Geoff Winkless
Тема Re: More correlated (?) index woes
Дата
Msg-id CAEzk6fekz9Rx=Xi9DLVxNEuyqTv1+OWFzoASn7v1Bibe_OLU2Q@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на More correlated (?) index woes  (Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin@geoff.dj>)
Ответы Re: More correlated (?) index woes  (Melvin Davidson <melvin6925@gmail.com>)
Re: More correlated (?) index woes  (bricklen <bricklen@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-general
On 28 March 2016 at 20:23, I wrote:
Table pa has 7522676 rows, 4834042 of which have field1 NULL, so it's absolutely not reasonable to expect this to be an optimal strategy.
It occurred to me that even though the majority of values are NULL, there are ​
 
​1691 unique values in pa.field1, so I suppose it might seem more attractive to the planner than it should do (that's more unique values than there are scdate entries).

I might just set enable_seqscan to false and leave it at that. It makes me unhappy though.

Geoff


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: John R Pierce
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_largeobject
Следующее
От: David Rowley
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Horrible/never returning performance using stable function on WHERE clause