> What happens if you go:
>
> CREATE INDEX annuncio400_rubric_testo_idx ON annuncio400(rubric,
> LOWER(testo));
>
> or even just:
>
> CREATE INDEX annuncio400_rubric_testo_idx ON annuncio400(LOWER(testo));
>
I wasn't able to make this 2 field index with lower:
dba400=# CREATE INDEX annuncio400_rubric_testo_idx ON
annuncio400(rubric, LOWER(testo));
ERROR: parser: parse error at or near "(" at character 71
seems impossible to creat 2 field indexes with lower function.
The other one does not make it use the index.
>> But the strangest thing ever is that if I change the filter with
>> another one that represent a smaller amount of data it uses the
>> index scan!!!
>
>
> What's strange about that? The less data is going to be retrieved,
> the more likely postgres is to use the index.
>
can't understand this policy:
dba400=# SELECT count(*) from annuncio400 where rubric='DD';
count
-------
6753
(1 row)
dba400=# SELECT count(*) from annuncio400 where rubric='MA';
count
-------
2165
(1 row)
so it's using the index on 2000 rows and not for 6000? it's not that
big difference, isn't it?
> I suggest maybe increasing the amount of stats recorded for your
> rubrik column:
>
> ALTER TABLE annuncio400 ALTER rubrik SET STATISTICS 100;
> ANALYZE annuncio400;
>
done, almost the same, still not using index
> You could also try reducing the random_page_cost value in your
> postgresql.conf a little, say to 3 (if it's currently 4). That will
> make postgres more likely to use index scans over seq scans.
>
changed the setting on postgresql.conf, restarted the server,
nothing has changed.
what about setting this to false?
#enable_seqscan = true
thanks again
Edoardo
