> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > My guess is that the creation of the index updates the table size
> > statistics.
>
> Yes.
>
> > However, when I see zero size, I don't know if it is accurate, or if
> > someone has added rows since the last vacuum/index creation, so I think
> > it is correct to use an index on a zero-length table if it is
> > appropriate. If the size is 1, I will assume that number is accurate,
> > and do a sequential scan.
> >
> > Does that make sense?
>
> Yes. But we have to fix SeqScan for field1 = -1...
Woh, I just tried it myself, and was able to reproduce it. I will check
into it now. Gee, that is very strange.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
