From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Guillaume Smet <guillaume_ml@smet.org>
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Bad plan after vacuum analyze
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 15:38:16 -0400
Message-ID: <14301.1115840296@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42825DBB.7000703@smet.org>
References: <42823F94.8050009@smet.org>
<200505111110.15983.josh@agliodbs.com>
<13964.1115837926@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<42825DBB.7000703@smet.org>
Guillaume Smet <guillaume_ml@smet.org> writes:
>> If so, can we see the pg_stats rows for the object_id and
>> parent_application_id columns?
> See attached file.
Well, those stats certainly appear to justify the planner's belief that
the indexscan needn't run very far: the one value of
parent_application_id is 1031 and this is below the smallest value of
object_id seen by analyze. You might have better luck if you increase
the statistics target for acs_objects.object_id. (It'd be interesting
to know what fraction of acs_objects actually does have object_id < 1032.)
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, guillaume_ml@smet.org, josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: Bad plan after vacuum analyze
In-Reply-To: <14301.1115840296@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox