2012/5/27 Ivan Voras <ivoras@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > On 27 May 2012 05:28, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hello >> >> 2012/5/26 Ivan Voras <ivoras@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I have a SQL function (which I've pasted below) and while testing its >>> code directly (outside a function), this is the "normal", default plan: >>> >>> http://explain.depesz.com/s/vfP (67 ms) >>> >>> and this is the plain with enable_seqscan turned off: >>> >>> http://explain.depesz.com/s/EFP (27 ms) >>> >>> Disabling seqscan results in almost 2.5x faster execution. >>> >>> However, when this code is wrapped in a function, the execution time is >>> closer to the second case (which is great, I'm not complaining): >>> >> >> see http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2009-12/msg01189.php > > Hi, > > Thank you for your answer, but if you read my post, you'll hopefully > realize my questions are different from that in the linked post, and > are not answered by the post. yes, sorry, Pavel -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
