> >If you want both the max and the min, then things are going to be a
> >bit more work. You are either going to want to do two separate
> >selects or join two selects or use subselects. If there aren't
> >enough prices per stock, the sequential scan might be fastest since
> >you only need to go through the table once and don't have to hit
> >the index blocks.
> >
> >It is still odd that you didn't get a big speed up for just the min though.
>
> I found I'm suffering from an effect detailed in a previous thread titled
>
> Does "correlation" mislead the optimizer on large tables?
I don't know about large tables, but this is a big problem and
something I'm going to spend some time validating later today. I
think Manfred's patch is pretty good and certainly better than where
we are but I haven't used it yet to see if it's the magic ticket for
many of these index problems.
-sc
--
Sean Chittenden