Tom Lane ha scritto:
Daniele Varrazzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
There is an index in the field "foo.account_id" but is not used. The resulting
query plan is:
Aggregate (cost=300940.70..300940.71 rows=1 width=0) (actual
time=13412.088..13412.089 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Hash IN Join (cost
Daniele Varrazzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There is an index in the field "foo.account_id" but is not used. The
> resulting
> query plan is:
> Aggregate (cost=300940.70..300940.71 rows=1 width=0) (actual
> time=13412.088..13412.089 rows=1 loops=1)
> -> Hash IN Join (cost=11.97..2998
Hello,
I am experiencing a query for which an useful index is not being used by
PostgreSQL. The query is in the form:
select count(*) from foo
where foo.account_id in (
select id from accounts where system = 'abc');
and the size of the tables it works on is:
- 270 records i
Tengo una pregunta, y este es el escenario de lo que tengo
Se crea una instancia de
postgreSQL
Se crea un directorio
$PGDATA/walback donde se almacenararn los wal antiguos
Se exporta una variable $PGDATA2
Hi, i'm new to this ML, i'll try to explain my issue:
I've two tables defined as is (postgresql 8.1):
CREATE TABLE table1
(
_id serial,
num1 int4 not null,
num2 int4 not null,
primary key(_id)
);
CREATE INDEX table1IDX1 ON table1(num
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Howard Cole wrote:
Out of interest, if I could create a multicolumn index with both the primary
key and the fts key (I don't think I can create a multi-column index using
GIST with both the email_id and the fts field), would this reduce access to
the table due to the primar
Actually, the index returns page numbers in the table on disc which
may contain one or more rows that are relevant. Postgres has to fetch
the whole row to find out the email_id and any other information,
including whether the row is visible in your current transaction
(concurrency control c
