Robert Haas <robertmhaas@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> The very first thing to check is effective_cache_size and to set it to >> a reasonable value. > Actually, effective_cache_size has no impact on costing except when > planning a nested loop with inner index scan. So, a query against a > single table can never benefit from changing that setting. That's flat out wrong. It does affect the cost estimate for plain indexscan (and bitmap indexscan) plans. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
