From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Index scan startup time
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:16:13 +0200
Message-ID: <200603301716.13840.peter_e@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14358.1143728757@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <200603301359.11038.peter_e@gmx.net>
<20060330132915.GL6811@mathom.us>
<14358.1143728757@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane wrote:
> The problem here appears to be a non-random correlation between state
> and activity, such that the desired state values are not randomly
> scattered in the activity sequence. The planner doesn't know about
> that correlation and hence can't predict the poor startup time.
So from when to when is the startup time (the "x" in "x..y") actually
measured? When does the clock start ticking and when does it stop?
That is what's confusing me.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
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: peter_e@gmx.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, mstone+postgres@mathom.us
Subject: Re: Index scan startup time
In-Reply-To: <200603301716.13840.peter_e@gmx.net>
* 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