Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS
| От | Jean-Luc Lachance | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 3F5753B9.F4A5A63F@nsd.ca обсуждение исходный текст | 
| Ответ на | Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS ("Nick Fankhauser" <nickf@ontko.com>) | 
| Список | pgsql-performance | 
You forgot that the original poster's query was: SELECT * from <table> This should require a simple table scan. NO need for stats. Either the table has not been properly vacuumed or he's got seq_scan off... JLL Nick Fankhauser wrote: > > > Yes I Analyze also, but there was no need to because it was a fresh brand > > new database. > > This apparently wasn't the source of problem since he did an analyze anyway, > but my impression was that a fresh brand new database is exactly the > situation where an analyze is needed- ie: a batch of data has just been > loaded and stats haven't been collected yet. > > Am I mistaken? > > -Nick > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: