On Apr 7, 2008, at 1:32 AM, David Wilson wrote:
I have a reasonably large table (~75m rows,~18gb) called "vals". It includes an integer datestamp column with approximately 4000 unique entries across the rows; there is a normal btree index on the datestamp column. When I attempt something like "select distinct datestamp from vals", however, explain tells me it's doing a sequential scan:explain select distinct datestamp from vals; QUERY PLAN---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------Unique (cost=15003047.47..15380004.83 rows=4263 width=4) -> Sort (cost=15003047.47..15191526.15 rows=75391472 width=4) Sort Key: datestamp-> Seq Scan on vals v (cost=0.00..1531261.72 rows=75391472 width=4)
The databases estimates seem consistent with yours, so why is it doing this? Could you provide an EXPLAIN ANALYSE? It shows the actual numbers next to the estimates, although I figure that query might take a while...
Pg estimates the costs quite high too. It's almost as if there isn't an index on that column and it has no other way then doing a sequential scan... Could you show us the table definition and its indexes? What version of Pg is this?
It may be that your index on vals.datestamp doesn't fit into memory; what are the relevant configuration parameters for your database?
Regards, Alban Hertroys -- If you can't see the forest for the trees, cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest. !DSPAM:737,47f9b995927662100729983! -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
