Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Let me tell you why I don't think this is a bug. The optimizer will
> choose ordered results over unordered results if the costs are the same.
> In this case, the cost of the query is zero, so it chose to use the
> index because the index produces an ordered result.
>
> This works well for un-vacuumed tables, because it thinks everything is
> zero cost, and chooses the index.
Agreed, this is ok as long as
vac=> create table table1 (field1 int);
CREATE
vac=> insert into table1 values (1);
INSERT 1583349 1
vac=> create index i_table1__field1 on table1 (field1);
CREATE
vac=> explain select * from table1 where field1 = 1;
NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:
Seq Scan on table1 (cost=1.03 size=1 width=4)
- SeqScan is used for small tables.
So, only bug reported is left.
Vadim
