From: Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
To: Gary Warner <gar@cis.uab.edu>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Seq Scan used instead of Index Scan
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 14:30:01 +1300
Message-ID: <4ECD9E19.8080303@catalyst.net.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1930791595.3607.1322087076188.JavaMail.root@zimbra.cis.uab.edu>
References: <1930791595.3607.1322087076188.JavaMail.root@zimbra.cis.uab.edu>
Can you post your non-default postgresql.conf settings? (I'd hazard a
guess that you have effective_cache_size set to the default 128MB).
Best wishes
Mark
On 24/11/11 11:24, Gary Warner wrote:
> Very Fast Version:
>
> Recently my database stopped respecting one of my indexes, which took a query that should run in "subsecond response time" and turning it into something that with small data sets runs in the 7-10 minute range and with large data sets runs in the 30 minute - eternity range.
>
> Explain Analyze tells me that what used to be an Index Scan has become a Seq Scan, doing a full table scan through 140 million records.
>
> Any thoughts on why that happens?
>
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: mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz, gar@cis.uab.edu
Subject: Re: Seq Scan used instead of Index Scan
In-Reply-To: <4ECD9E19.8080303@catalyst.net.nz>
* 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