Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Michael Fuhr
Subject Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one
Date
Msg-id 20070330104611.GA1540@winnie.fuhr.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one  (Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>)
Responses Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one
Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 12:08:26PM +0200, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> Claus Guttesen wrote:
> > Try changing random_page_cost from the default 4 to 2 in postgresql.conf:
> >
> > random_page_cost = 2
>
> I have tuned that number already at 2.5, lowering it to 2 doesn't change
> the plan.

The following 19-fold overestimate is influencing the rest of the
plan:

  ->  Seq Scan on l_pvcp  (cost=0.00..2.17 rows=19 width=4) (actual time=0.066..0.081 rows=1 loops=1)
        Filter: (value ~~* '%pi%'::text)

Have you tried increasing the statistics target on l_pvcp.value?
I ran your queries against canned data in 8.2.3 and better statistics
resulted in more accurate row count estimates for this and other
parts of the plan.  I don't recall if estimates for non-leading-character
matches in earlier versions can benefit from better statistics.

--
Michael Fuhr

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: ismo.tuononen@solenovo.fi
Date:
Subject: Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one
Next
From: Michael Fuhr
Date:
Subject: Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one