Re: Simple Join - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Simple Join
Date
Msg-id 200512171456.jBHEunM07437@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Simple Join  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
Tom Lane wrote:
> Kevin Brown <blargity@gmail.com> writes:
> > I'm running 8.1 installed from source on a Debian Sarge server.  I have a
> > simple query that I believe I've placed the indexes correctly for, and I
> > still end up with a seq scan.  It makes sense, kinda, but it should be able
> > to use the index to gather the right values.
>
> I continue to marvel at how many people think that if it's not using an
> index it must ipso facto be a bad plan ...
>
> That plan looks perfectly fine to me.  You could try forcing some other
> choices by fooling with the planner enable switches (eg set
> enable_seqscan = off) but I doubt you'll find much improvement.  There
> are too many rows being pulled from ordered_products to make an index
> nestloop a good idea.

We do have an FAQ item:

     4.6) Why are my queries slow?  Why don't they use my indexes?

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Jaime Casanova
Date:
Subject: Re: Overriding the optimizer
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Should Oracle outperform PostgreSQL on a complex