Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A739FBE0E for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:48:41 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 90755-02-2 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:48:33 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 072FD9FBDAB for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:48:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l5JFmV24029699; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:48:31 -0400 (EDT) To: Karl Wright cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access In-reply-to: <4677F617.5000105@metacarta.com> References: <4676DD57.7070304@metacarta.com> <14291.1182221811@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4677B831.8060704@metacarta.com> <27690.1182263794@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4677ECA9.3000402@metacarta.com> <28036.1182264975@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4677F617.5000105@metacarta.com> Comments: In-reply-to Karl Wright message dated "Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:28:23 -0400" Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:48:31 -0400 Message-ID: <29698.1182268111@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200706/357 X-Sequence-Number: 25390 Karl Wright writes: > I did an ANALYZE on that table and repeated the explain, and got this: > ... > ... even more wildly wrong. Hmm. You might need to increase the statistics target for your larger tables. It's probably not a big deal for queries like this one, but I'm worried that you may be getting bad plans for complicated joins. regards, tom lane