Re: Why does query planner choose slower BitmapAnd ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Seamus Abshere
Subject Re: Why does query planner choose slower BitmapAnd ?
Date
Msg-id 1456163618.1013318.528482610.2E35A103@webmail.messagingengine.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why does query planner choose slower BitmapAnd ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Why does query planner choose slower BitmapAnd ?
List pgsql-general
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, at 02:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Seamus Abshere <seamus@abshere.net> writes:
> > Inspired, I changed cpu_index_tuple_cost to 0.1 (default: 0.005). It "fixed" my problem by preventing the
BitmapAnd.
> > Is this dangerous?
>
> Use a gentle tap, man, don't swing the hammer with quite so much abandon.
> I'd have tried doubling the setting to start with.  Raising it 20X might
> cause other queries to change behavior undesirably.

Doubling it was enough :)


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Why does query planner choose slower BitmapAnd ?
Next
From: Seamus Abshere
Date:
Subject: Re: Why does query planner choose slower BitmapAnd ?