select * from pg_stats where tablename = 'symbol_data' and attname ='symbol_name';
tablename | attname | null_frac | avg_width | n_distinct | most_common_vals | most_common_freqs | histogram_bounds | correlation
-------------+-------------+-----------+-----------+------------+----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------+-------------
symbol_data | symbol_name | 0 | 7 | 150712 | {EBALX,ELTE,SRP,KMG,MKC,AEN,BAC,BDX,BKF,BRT} | {0.0233333,0.018,0.00266667,0.00166667,0.00166667,0.00133333,0.00133333,0.00133333,0.00133333,0.00133333} | {A,BRN,DPAC,FUTR,INTC,MDSN,OCA,RAA,SSYS,USTB,_^^VPM} | 0.112971
(1 row)
I'll alter and play with the table tomorrow and let you know what I find.
-Michael
Tom Lane wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">"Michael G. Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:I just ran a vacuum analyze with the specific column. Still get the
same explain plan:
Did the pg_stats data change noticeably?
ANALYZE is a statistical sampling process in 7.2, so I'd expect the
results to move around somewhat each time you repeat it. But if it
changes a lot then we have a problem.
You could also try
ALTER TABLE symbol_data ALTER symbol_name SET STATISTICS n
for larger values of n (10 is the default) and then re-ANALYZE
to see if the stats get any more accurate. The default of 10
was more or less picked out of the air ... perhaps it's too small.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
