Re: performance; disk bad or something? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: performance; disk bad or something?
Date
Msg-id 29217.1175903030@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to performance; disk bad or something?  (Marcus Engene <mengpg2@engene.se>)
Responses Re: performance; disk bad or something?  (Marcus Engene <mengpg2@engene.se>)
List pgsql-general
Marcus Engene <mengpg2@engene.se> writes:
>          ->  Index Scan using apa_item_common_x1 on apa_item_common aic
> (cost=0.00..4956.68 rows=1174 width=8) (actual time=19.854..9557.606
> rows=1226 loops=1)

If the table only has 12000 rows then it should never have used an index
scan here at all --- a plain seqscan is usually the best bet for
retrieving 10% of a table.  Are you using nondefault planner settings?

How big is the table physically (VACUUM VERBOSE output about it might
tell something)?

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Database replication.
Next
From: "John D. Burger"
Date:
Subject: New to concurrency