2008/6/28 Steve Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Jun 27, 2008, at 9:53 PM, Adam Rich wrote:
>
>
>>
>>> "Bob Duffey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>>> I'm seeing some query plans that I'm not expecting. The tabl
2008/6/28 Adam Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > This is not wrong, or at least not obviously wrong. A full-table
> > indexscan is often slower than seqscan-and-sort. If the particular
> > case is wrong for you, you need to look at adjusting the planner's
> > cost parameters to match your environm
2008/6/28 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> "Bob Duffey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm seeing some query plans that I'm not expecting. The table in
> question
> > is reasonably big (130,000,000 rows). The table has a primary key,
> inde
Hi,
I'm seeing some query plans that I'm not expecting. The table in question
is reasonably big (130,000,000 rows). The table has a primary key, indexed
by one field ("ID", of type bigint). Thus, I would expect the following
query to simply scan through the table using the primary key:
select
