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.