>> Maybe I should create an index on (num_editeur, num_site, num_emplacement)
>> ?
>
>
> Yes. Try to. This is the best choice.
Here it comes :
VACUUM VERBOSE ANALYZE accord_editeur;
NOTICE: --Relation accord_editeur--
NOTICE: Pages 7096: Changed 0, reaped 6790, Empty 0, New 0; Tup 447032:
Vac 0, Keep/VTL 0/0, Crash 0, UnUsed 23768, MinLen 124, MaxLen 124;
Re-using: Free/Avail. Space 721776/0; EndEmpty/Avail. Pages 0/0. CPU
0.39s/1.67u sec.
NOTICE: Index ae_tracking_idx: Pages 2300; Tuples 447032: Deleted 0.
CPU 0.07s/0.90u sec.
VACUUM
EXPLAIN :
NOTICE: QUERY PLAN:
Nested Loop (cost=0.00..228.27 rows=1 width=56)
-> Index Scan using parametre_tracking_idx on parametre par
(cost=0.00..2.02 rows=1 width=8)
-> Index Scan using ae_tracking_idx on accord_editeur ae
(cost=0.00..225.50 rows=60 width=48)
EXPLAIN
So, no change for the cost...
Only for the number of pages...
So, if I can't more optimize my index, what else should I try ?
It uses too much CPU for me...
