Re: seq scan instead of index scan - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Karl Larsson
Subject Re: seq scan instead of index scan
Date
Msg-id d7650d320912171546m66e269b4l919a881988f475bf@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: seq scan instead of index scan  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: seq scan instead of index scan  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance


On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Karl Larsson <karl.larsson47@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I have a problem I don't understand. I hope it's a simple problem and I'm
> just stupid.
>
> When I make a subquery Postgres don't care about my indexes and makes
> a seq scan instead of a index scan. Why?

PostgreSQL uses an intelligent query planner that predicets how many
rows it will get back for each plan and chooses accordingly.  Since a
few dozen rows will all likely fit in the same block, it's way faster
to sequentially scan the table than to use an index scan.

Note that pgsql always has to go back to the original table to get the
rows anyway, since visibility info is not stored in the indexes.

I forgot to mention  that I have a reel problem with 937(and growing) rows of data. My test tables
and test query is just to exemplify my problem. But I'll extend table_two and see if it change anything.

/ Karl Larsson

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: seq scan instead of index scan
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: seq scan instead of index scan