Re: [SQL] Index selection on a large table
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Michael Richards" <michael@fastmail.ca>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Date: 2000-07-25T23:30:39Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
"Michael Richards" <michael@fastmail.ca> writes: > The following query yeilds the questionable query plan: > explain select * from logins where ip='38.30.141.44'; > NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: > Seq Scan on logins (cost=0.00..25248.51 rows=11602 width=48) If there really were 11602 matching rows, the seq scan likely would be the way to go. So the issue here is poor selectivity estimation. You said you did a VACUUM, but you didn't mention if you'd ever done a VACUUM ANALYZE. That looks to me like it's using the default 1% selectivity estimate, which is what you'd get if you hadn't ever done an ANALYZE. If you have done one, what do you get from select attname,attdisbursion,s.* from pg_statistic s, pg_attribute a, pg_class c where starelid = c.oid and attrelid = c.oid and staattnum = attnum and relname = 'logins'; ? regards, tom lane