Re: strange query plan
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Mario Weilguni <mweilguni@sime.com>
Cc: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Date: 2001-04-08T11:50:44Z
Lists: pgsql-general
Mario Weilguni writes: > Now when I type: > explain select min(id)from log; > NOTICE: QUERY PLAN: > > Aggregate (cost=45702.20..45702.20 rows=1 width=4) > -> Seq Scan on log (cost=0.00..41978.36 rows=1489536 width=4) > > I don't understand why the index log_pkey is not used here. I guess it would > be much cheaper to consult the index to get min(), max(), sum() and avg() > instead of sequentially scanning ~500MB of data. Since your query reads the entire "log" table, it is certainly better to use a sequential scan in the case of sum() and avg(). A min() and max() would theoretically not need to scan the entire table in the presence of an index, but unfortunately this doesn't work yet. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/