Re: [PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread A. Kretschmer
am Wed, dem 11.07.2007, um 22:19:58 +0200 mailte Andreas Kretschmer folgendes: > > Also, part of the problem here looks to be an overestimate of the number > > of rows matching ab = 347735. It might help to increase the statistics > > target for that column. > > I will try this tomorrow and info

Re: [PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread Alex Deucher
On 7/11/07, Alex Deucher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 7/11/07, A. Kretschmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > am Wed, dem 11.07.2007, um 14:52:01 -0400 mailte Alex Deucher folgendes: > > >Okay, i got a really different plan, but i expected _NOT_ a > > >performance-boost like this. I expected the op

Re: [PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread Andreas Kretschmer
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: Thanks you and Alex for the response. > > PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on i386-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 3.3.5 > > (Debian 1:3.3.5-13) > > You need a newer one. I know ;-) > > This is simply a stupid choice on the part of choose_bitmap_and() --- > it's

Re: [PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread Tom Lane
Andreas Kretschmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Okay, i know, not really a recent version: > PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on i386-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 3.3.5 (Debian > 1:3.3.5-13) You need a newer one. > -> BitmapAnd (cost=1217.69..1217.69 rows=39 width=0) (actual > time=163.68

Re: [PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread Alex Deucher
On 7/11/07, A. Kretschmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: am Wed, dem 11.07.2007, um 14:52:01 -0400 mailte Alex Deucher folgendes: > >Okay, i got a really different plan, but i expected _NOT_ a > >performance-boost like this. I expected the opposite. > > > > > >It's not a really problem, i just playe

Re: [PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread A. Kretschmer
am Wed, dem 11.07.2007, um 14:52:01 -0400 mailte Alex Deucher folgendes: > >Okay, i got a really different plan, but i expected _NOT_ a > >performance-boost like this. I expected the opposite. > > > > > >It's not a really problem, i just played with this. But i'm confused > >about this... > > > >

Re: [PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread Alex Deucher
On 7/11/07, Andreas Kretschmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Okay, i know, not really a recent version: PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on i386-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13) I have a fresh ANALYZED table with some indexes. scholl=*# set enable_bitmapscan=1; SET scholl=*#

[PERFORM] bitmap-index-scan slower than normal index scan

2007-07-11 Thread Andreas Kretschmer
Hi, Okay, i know, not really a recent version: PostgreSQL 8.1.4 on i386-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC cc (GCC) 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13) I have a fresh ANALYZED table with some indexes. scholl=*# set enable_bitmapscan=1; SET scholl=*# explain analyse select sum(flaeche) from bde_meldungen where