Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE

mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>

From: mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Thomas Lockhart <thomas@fourpalms.org>, Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh@pop.jaring.my>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, Louis-David Mitterrand <vindex@apartia.org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-04-17T18:50:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> 
> mlw writes:
> 
> > Adding huristics, such as weighting for index scans, is not making the planner
> > stupider. It is making it smarter and more flexable.
> 
> If life was as simple as index or no index then this might make some
> sense.  But in general the planner has a whole bunch of choices of join
> plans, sorts, scans, and the cost of an individual index scan is hidden
> down somewhere in the leaf nodes, so you can't simply say that plans of
> type X should be preferred when the cost estimates are close.
> 
No doubt, no one is arguing that it is easy, but as I said in a branch of this
discussion, when the planner has multiple choices, and the cost ranges
overlapp, the relative numbers are not so meaningful that huristics would not
improve the algorithm.