Re: Bad plan after vacuum analyze - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Markus Bertheau
Subject Re: Bad plan after vacuum analyze
Date
Msg-id 1116009335.7327.0.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bad plan after vacuum analyze  (Guillaume Smet <guillaume_ml@smet.org>)
List pgsql-performance
В Срд, 11/05/2005 в 22:59 +0200, Guillaume Smet пишет:

> Anyway, I tried to work on the statistics as you told me and here are
> the results:
> ccm_perf=# ALTER TABLE acs_objects ALTER COLUMN object_id SET STATISTICS 30;
> ALTER TABLE
> ccm_perf=# ANALYZE acs_objects;
> ANALYZE
>
> ccm_perf=# \i query_section.sql
> ... correct plan ...
>   Total runtime: 0.555 ms

Given Tom's analysis, how can increasing the stats target change which
plan is chosen?

--
Markus Bertheau <twanger@bluetwanger.de>

Attachment

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: John A Meinel
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimize complex join to use where condition before
Next
From: "Joel Fradkin"
Date:
Subject: ok you all win what is best opteron (I dont want a hosed system again)