On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 05:15:05PM +0200, Böckler Andreas wrote: > Hi Ken, > > Am 26.10.2012 um 16:55 schrieb ktm@xxxxxxxx: > > > Hi Andy, > > > > You have the sequential_page_cost = 1 which is better than or equal to > > the random_page_cost in all of your examples. > > It sounds like you need > > a sequential_page_cost of 5, 10, 20 or more. > > You're right it was sequential_page_cost = 1 because it's really irrelevant what I do here: > set random_page_cost=2; > set seq_page_cost=5; > '2012-05-01' AND '2012-08-30' -> NESTEDLOOP > '2012-04-01' AND '2012-08-30' -> SEQSCAN > > a) there will be a point, where things will go bad > this is like patching up a roof 'till you find the next hole instead of making it right at the beginning of construction process > b) they high seq costs might be true for that table (partition at 40gb), but not for the rest of the database > Seqscan-Costs per table would be great. > > Regards, > > Andy > Hi Andy, You can set them per tablespace. Maybe you could put the appropriate tables that need the higher costing on the same one. Regards, Ken -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
