On Sun, Apr 06, 2008 at 07:32:58PM -0400, David Wilson wrote:
> I have a reasonably large table (~75m rows,~18gb) called "vals". It
> includes an integer datestamp column with approximately 4000 unique
> entries across the rows; there is a normal btree index on the
> datestamp column. When I attempt something like "select distinct
> datestamp from vals", however, explain tells me it's doing a
> sequential scan:
I'm a bit late to the party, but someone had a similar problem a while
back and solved it with an SRF as follows (pseudo-code):
BEGIN
curr := (SELECT field FROM table ORDER BY field LIMIT 1 )
RETURN NEXT curr;
WHILE( curr )
curr := (SELECT field FROM table WHERE field > curr ORDER BY field LIMIT 1 )
RETURN NEXT curr;
END
END
If you have 5000 unique values it will do 5000 index lookup which would
be bad except it's better than 75 million rows as is in your case.
Whether it's faster is something you'll have to test, but it's another
approach to the problem.
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Please line up in a tree and maintain the heap invariant while
> boarding. Thank you for flying nlogn airlines.
