Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE
Michael Loftis <mloftis@wgops.com>
From: Michael Loftis <mloftis@wgops.com>
To: Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
Cc: mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2002-04-17T09:44:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Oliver Elphick wrote: >On Wed, 2002-04-17 at 06:51, mlw wrote: > >>I just think there is sufficient evidence to suggest that if a DBA creates an >>index, there is strong evidence (better than statistics) that the index need be >>used. In the event that an index exists, there is a strong indication that, >>without overwhelming evidence, that the index should be used. You have admitted >>that statistics suck, but the existence of an index must weight (heavily) on >>the evaluation on whether or not to use an index. >> > >But indexes are not, for the most part, there because of a specific >choice to have an index, but as the implementation of PRIMARY KEY and >UNIQUE. Therefore the main part of your argument fails. > That is not my experience. Wholly 3/4's of the indices in PeopleSoft, SAP, and Clarify (on top of Oracle 8 and 8i backends) are there solely for perfomance reasons, the remaining 1/4 are there because of uniqueness and primary key responsibilities. In many of the cases where it is a primary key it is also there to ensure fast lookups when referenced as a foreign key. Or for joins.