Re: disabling seq scans - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc
From | Marcus Andree S. Magalhaes |
---|---|
Subject | Re: disabling seq scans |
Date | |
Msg-id | 64085.200.174.148.100.1080853928.squirrel@webmail.webnow.com.br Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: disabling seq scans (Sean Shanny <shannyconsulting@earthlink.net>) |
Responses |
Re: disabling seq scans
Re: disabling seq scans Re: disabling seq scans |
List | pgsql-jdbc |
Yes, that is what I thought 1st... But, since we're using pooled connections, we must be extra careful and ensure all connections have the enable_seqscan reset to its default. So, the main question is: Do the pooling system resets the "enable_seqscan" variable when the connections are delivered to the clients or we *must* do it ourselves? Another issue: when enable_seqscan is false, I found that the sequential scanning is performed normally (as in "select count (*) from <table>") but have them any performance issues? Last one... This time, specifically to the java side: what do you think about adding new methods, say, setEnableSeqScan(boolean) and getEnableSeqScan() to our (by our I mean postgres) drivers? > I do the following in several reports I run..... > > statement = m_conn.createStatement(); > statement.executeUpdate( "set enable_seqscan = false" ); > do your thing.... > statement.executeUpdate( "set enable_seqscan = true" ); > > --sean > > Marcus Andree S. Magalhaes wrote: > >>Hi, guys, >> >>We're experiencing a little problem with one of our queries. >>It isn't using an index specially created for it. When we >>disable seq scans with psql, we can ensure the query finishes >>much faster than without using index, as it should be. >> >>So, whats the best procedure in this case, but when have a >>JDBC based client? Do we mess around with planner >>settings even when all other queries are using the best >>index for them? >> >>Is it safe (but some may find ugly) to issue a command to >>disable seq scanning from the java side? >> >>Since we're using the pooled connection classes that comes >>with the JDBC3 driver, once a connection is got from the pool, >>do we need to explicitly set seq scanning to true? This is >>assuming the later option is the more recommended one... >> >>TIA >> >> >> >>---------------------------(end of >> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your >> friend >> >> >> > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if > your > joining column's datatypes do not match
pgsql-jdbc by date: