From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Witham <davidw@unidial.com.au>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Index question
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:38:22 -0500
Message-ID: <28006.1076650702@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CFA248776934FD43847E740E43C346D199DBE9@ozimelb03.ozicom.com>
References: <CFA248776934FD43847E740E43C346D199DBE9@ozimelb03.ozicom.com>
"David Witham" <davidw@unidial.com.au> writes:
> I understand that selecting count(*) will involve a scan at some
> stage, but I was surprised that the index wasn't used in the >= case,
> but was used in the between case.
Given the estimated row counts in your examples, the planner's choices
are not surprising. You have not given us any information on whether
those estimates are accurate.
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, davidw@unidial.com.au
Subject: Re: Index question
In-Reply-To: <28006.1076650702@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