On 28 October 2011 09:02, Mohamed Hashim <nmdhashim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > EXPLAIN select * from stk_source ; > QUERY > PLAN > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Result (cost=0.00..6575755.39 rows=163132513 width=42) > -> Append (cost=0.00..6575755.39 rows=163132513 width=42) > -> Seq Scan on stk_source (cost=0.00..42.40 rows=1080 width=45) > -> Seq Scan on stk_source (cost=0.00..20928.37 rows=519179 > width=42) > -> Seq Scan on stk_source (cost=0.00..85125.82 rows=2111794 > width=42) > -> Seq Scan on stk_source (cost=0.00..6469658.80 rows=160500460 > width=42) That plan gives you the best possible performance given your query. Your example probably doesn't fit the problem you're investigating. -- If you can't see the forest for the trees, Cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
