On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:08 AM, wrote:
> In my example the seq-scan evaulates 50K tuples and the heap-scan 40K.
> The question is why does the "per-tuple" evaluation become that much more
> expensive (x7.5)[1] on the seq-scan than on the index-scan, when the
> complete dataset indeed is in memo
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Jesper Krogh wrote:
>> Given that the seq-scan have to visit 50K row to create the result and
>> the bitmap heap scan only have to visit 40K (but search the index) we
>> would expect the seq-scan to be at most 25% more expensive than the
>> bitmap-heap scan.. e.g
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Jesper Krogh wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm currently trying to figure out why the tsearch performance seems to
> vary a lot between different queryplans. I have created a sample dataset
> that sort of resembles the data I have to work on.
>
> The script that builds the data
