Yes, I enter query manually while testing. Here are explain plans :
for select count(*) from poll_3 where eid = 72333
Aggregate (cost=34697.64..34697.65 rows=1 width=0)
- Seq Scan on poll_3 (cost=0.00..34650.40 rows=18893 width=0)
Filter: (eid = 72333)
for for select count(*) from
Alex Vinogradovs wrote:
Yes, I enter query manually while testing. Here are explain plans :
for select count(*) from poll_3 where eid = 72333
Aggregate (cost=34697.64..34697.65 rows=1 width=0)
- Seq Scan on poll_3 (cost=0.00..34650.40 rows=18893 width=0)
Filter: (eid = 72333)
paul rivers wrote:
Alex Vinogradovs wrote:
Yes, I enter query manually while testing. Here are explain plans :
for select count(*) from poll_3 where eid = 72333
Aggregate (cost=34697.64..34697.65 rows=1 width=0)
- Seq Scan on poll_3 (cost=0.00..34650.40 rows=18893 width=0)
Hello all,
I have a table which is partitioned by range into 10 pieces with
constraint exceptions. Constraint exceptions is enabled in server
configuration too. For some reason, queries to the master table
are still slower than direct queries against partitions. Is there
any real reason for
Alex Vinogradovs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello all,
I have a table which is partitioned by range into 10 pieces with
constraint exceptions. Constraint exceptions is enabled in server
configuration too. For some reason, queries to the master table
are still slower than direct queries
Alex Vinogradovs wrote:
Hello all,
I have a table which is partitioned by range into 10 pieces with
constraint exceptions. Constraint exceptions is enabled in server
configuration too. For some reason, queries to the master table
are still slower than direct queries against partitions. Is
