Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
Subject Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?
Date
Msg-id opsdj710chcq72hf@musicbox
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Responses Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?  (Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>)
List pgsql-performance
>> Also, count(*) is likely to always generate a seq scan due to the way
>> aggregates are implemented currently in pgsql.  you might want to try:


    By the way, in an ideal world, count(*) should only read the index on the
timetamp column, not the rows. I guess this is not the case. Would this be
an useful optimization ?

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?
Next
From: Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Why does a simple query not use an obvious index?