Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > 2008/9/1 David West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Thanks for your suggestion but the result is the same. >> >> Here is the explain analyse output from different queries. >> Select * from my_table where A is null and B = '21' limit 15 >> >> "Limit (cost=0.00..3.68 rows=15 width=128) (actual >> time=85837.043..85896.140 rows=15 loops=1)" >> " -> Seq Scan on my_table this_ (cost=0.00..258789.88 rows=1055580 >> width=128) (actual time=85837.038..85896.091 rows=15 loops=1)" >> " Filter: ((A IS NULL) AND ((B)::text = '21'::text))" >> "Total runtime: 85896.214 ms" >> >> [snip]
Further to Pavel's comments; (actual time=85837.038..85896.091 rows=15 loops=1) That's 85 seconds on a sequence scan to return the first tuple. The table is not bloated by any chance is it? Regards Russell -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
