Hi,
Am I wrong or AGE() always gets directed to a sequential scan?
# BEGIN;
] SET enable_seqscan TO off;
] EXPLAIN ANALYZE
] SELECT count(1)
] FROM incomingmessageslog
] WHERE AGE(time) < '1 year';
] ROLLBACK;
BEGIN
SET
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aggregate (cost=100000528.33..100000528.34 rows=1 width=0) (actual time=13.789..13.790 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Seq Scan on incomingmessageslog (cost=100000000.00..100000520.00 rows=3333 width=0) (actual
time=13.783..13.783rows=0 loops=1)
Filter: (age((('now'::text)::date)::timestamp without time zone, "time") < '1 year'::interval)
Total runtime: 13.852 ms
(4 rows)
ROLLBACK
As far as I know, AGE() can take advantage of a very simple equation for
constant comparisons:
= AGE(field) < constant_criteria
= AGE(field, constant_ts) < constant_criteria
= AGE(field) < constant_criteria + constant_ts
= AGE(field) < CONSTANT_CRITERIA
How much does such a hack into optimizer cost? I don't know about its
implications but I'll really appreciate such a functionality. At the
moment, I'm trying replace every AGE() usage in my code and it really
feels a PITA.
Regards.
