From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@redhat.com>
Cc: pgsql-perform <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: encouraging index-only scans
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 17:27:39 -0500
Message-ID: <50C904DB.9090305@dunslane.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50C90154.8060103@dunslane.net>
References: <50C8F1EC.9010801@dunslane.net>
<15321.1355347953@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<50C90154.8060103@dunslane.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
On 12/12/2012 05:12 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 12/12/2012 04:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>>> A client is testing a migration from 9.1 to 9.2, and has found that a
>>> large number of queries run much faster if they use index-only scans.
>>> However, the only way he has found to get such a plan is by increasing
>>> the seq_page_cost to insanely high levels (3.5). Is there any approved
>>> way to encourage such scans that's a but less violent than this?
>> Is the pg_class.relallvisible estimate for the table realistic? They
>> might need a few more VACUUM and ANALYZE cycles to get it into the
>> neighborhood of reality, if not.
>
> That was the problem - I didn't know this hadn't been done.
>
Actually, the table had been analysed but not vacuumed, so this kinda
begs the question what will happen to this value on pg_upgrade? Will
people's queries suddenly get slower until autovacuum kicks in on the table?
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
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: andrew@dunslane.net, tgl@redhat.com
Subject: Re: encouraging index-only scans
In-Reply-To: <50C904DB.9090305@dunslane.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