On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Korisk <Korisk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What's your seq_page_cost and random_page_cost? > hashes=# SELECT name, setting, reset_val FROM pg_settings WHERE setting <> reset_val; > name | setting | reset_val > -------------------------+----------------+----------- > archive_command | (disabled) | > enable_bitmapscan | off | on > enable_indexscan | off | on > enable_seqscan | off | on > log_file_mode | 0600 | 384 > random_page_cost | 0.1 | 4 > seq_page_cost | 0.1 | 1 > transaction_isolation | read committed | default > unix_socket_permissions | 0777 | 511 Could you please try to set *_page_cost to 1 and then EXPLAIN ANALYZE it again? > -> Index Only Scan Backward using hashcheck_name_idx on public.hashcheck > (cost=10000000000.00..10000398674.92 rows=25986792 width=32) > (actual time=0.104..3785.767 rows=25990002 loops=1) I am just guessing but it might probably be some kind of a precision bug, and I would like to check this. > (9 rows) > > Postgresql 9.2.1 was configured and built with default settings. > > Thank you. -- Sergey Konoplev a database and software architect http://www.linkedin.com/in/grayhemp Jabber: gray.ru@xxxxxxxxx Skype: gray-hemp Phone: +14158679984 -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
