Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946AB650170 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:32:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55962-06 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:32:04 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0CE9650146 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:32:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m9V0VuRX013273; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 20:31:56 -0400 (EDT) To: Jeff Frost cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Index usage problem on 8.3.3 In-reply-to: <490A4EBE.9030804@frostconsultingllc.com> References: <490A4EBE.9030804@frostconsultingllc.com> Comments: In-reply-to Jeff Frost message dated "Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:18:06 -0700" Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 20:31:56 -0400 Message-ID: <13272.1225413116@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200810/137 X-Sequence-Number: 31718 Jeff Frost writes: > I've run across a strange problem with PG 8.3.3 not using indexes on a > particular table after building the table during a transaction. This may be a HOT side-effect ... is pg_index.indcheckxmin set for the index? regards, tom lane