>>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 10:35 AM, in message <1806D1F73FCB7F439F2C842EE0627B18065BF2C0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Relyea, Mike" <Mike.Relyea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm running 8.2.4 on Windows XP with 1.5 GB memory. > shared_buffers = 12288 > effective_cache_size = 10000 For starters, you might want to adjust one or both of these. It looks to me like you're telling it that it only has 78.125 MB cache space. That will make it tend to want to scan entire tables, on the assumption that the cache hit ratio will be poor for random reads. Since you're on 8.2.4, you can use units of measure to help make this easier to read. You could, for example, say: shared_buffers = 96MB effective_cache_size = 1200MB -Kevin ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
