> This table currently has 224 rows of data in it.
>
> The following queries *ALL* take approx. .433 seconds to run.
>
> select * from status s where s.site_id = 18 and s.host_id = 49 and
> s.product = 'BETA' and s.class = 'APPS' and s.subclass = 'MONITOR' ;
> select * from status s where s.site_
Fran Fabrizio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Seq Scan on status s (cost=0.00..9.04 rows=1 width=84)
>
> 010502.11:24:05.003 [3029] CommitTransactionCommand
>
> Which is incorrect because it should be using my index, shouldn't
> it? Here is how I created my index:
If a table is small (you ha
I'm sorry that I did not send the EXPLAIN results along with my original email,
I had no idea this command existed (I'm a first-week rookie with postgres!)
Also, I did not know about vacuum, and apparently, that was the culprit! After
vacuum'ing, times went from .433 sec/query to .001. Holy mol
