Re: encouraging index-only scans - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: encouraging index-only scans
Date
Msg-id 50C90154.8060103@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to encouraging index-only scans  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: encouraging index-only scans
List pgsql-performance
On 12/12/2012 04:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> A client is testing a migration from 9.1 to 9.2, and has found that a
>> large number of queries run much faster if they use index-only scans.
>> However, the only way he has found to get such a plan is by increasing
>> the seq_page_cost to insanely high levels (3.5). Is there any approved
>> way to encourage such scans that's a but less violent than this?
> Is the pg_class.relallvisible estimate for the table realistic?  They
> might need a few more VACUUM and ANALYZE cycles to get it into the
> neighborhood of reality, if not.

That was the problem - I didn't know this hadn't been done.

>
> Keep in mind also that small values of random_page_cost necessarily
> decrease the apparent advantage of index-only scans.  If you think 3.5
> is an "insanely high" setting, I wonder whether you haven't driven those
> numbers too far in the other direction to compensate for something else.

Right.

Thanks for the help.

cheers

andrew




pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: encouraging index-only scans
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: encouraging index-only scans