On Tue, 11 Jan 2000, admin wrote:
> > > I'm trying to use an index on a varchar(32) field, but explain keeps
> > > retuning a sequential scan. This is my table and index:
> >
> > I had a similar problem last year when trying to use an index on a
> > char(8) field. Two solutions worked for me:
> > I'm trying to use an index on a varchar(32) field, but explain keeps
> > retuning a sequential scan. This is my table and index:
>
> I had a similar problem last year when trying to use an index on a
> char(8) field. Two solutions worked for me: 1) use "bpchar_ops", and
> 2) leave out the o
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, admin wrote:
> Following a few suggestions, I have entered 2500 records in the
> manufacturer table. Unfortunately, searching for name in the manufacturer
> table still returned a sequential scan.
>
> I then tried changing the btree index to a hash talbe and went through the
I have changed the name field to a char(32) NOT NULL, and I still get a
sequential scan. I have added the 2500 records and I did "vacuumdb
database" from the command-line. Unfortunately, "vacuum analyze" from the
psql prompt returns a pqReadData() error, loses the connection to the
backend and ret
Yes, I did try vacuum analyze, but my search query still uses a sequential
scan.
> > I then tried changing the btree index to a hash talbe and went through the
> > same procedure of vacumming and restarting a psql session. Yet again, the
> > index wasn't being used.
>
> But did you try vacuum an
> I then tried changing the btree index to a hash talbe and went through the
> same procedure of vacumming and restarting a psql session. Yet again, the
> index wasn't being used.
But did you try vacuum analyze or just vacuum?
