Yeah, analyze did make a difference. See below.
--
Index Scan using october_begin_time on october_cdr_call
(cost=0.00..98383.82 r
ows=24594 width=568) (actual time=0.280..79274.579 rows=538592 loops=1)
Index Cond: ((beg
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:21:21PM -0600, David Durham wrote:
> sipcdr=# explain analyze select * from october_cdr_call where begin_time
> >= '10/1/2005' and begin_time < '10/4/2005';
>
> QUERY PLAN
>
>
>
Michael Fuhr wrote:
No need to guess: run the queries with enable_seqscan disabled and
see if an index scan is indeed faster.
select max(myTimeStamp) from myTable;
In current releases min() and max() can't use indexes; search the
archives for numerous discussions of the reasons. The work
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 12:18:19PM -0600, David Durham wrote:
> Apologies if this questions is asked often. I'm doing some select
> statements based on a timestamp field. I have an index on the field,
> and when I use the '=' operator the index is used. However, if I use
> the '>' or '<' oper
am 01.11.2005, um 12:18:19 -0600 mailte David Durham folgendes:
> Apologies if this questions is asked often. I'm doing some select
> statements based on a timestamp field. I have an index on the field, and
> when I use the '=' operator the index is used. However, if I use the '>'
> or '<' o
Apologies if this questions is asked often. I'm doing some select
statements based on a timestamp field. I have an index on the field,
and when I use the '=' operator the index is used. However, if I use
the '>' or '<' operators, then it does a full table scan. I've got
around 6 million row
