David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 29 March 2018 at 18:26, Cory Tucker <cory.tuc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The plan on 9.6 v 10.3 are effectively identical except in 9.6 the planner
>> decides to use an index only scan on the primary key and in 10.3 it does a
>> sequential scan. The problem is the sequential scan is for a table of 75M
>> rows and 25 columns so its quiet a lot of pages it has to traverse.
> How certain are you that all the indexes match on each instance?
Another possibility is that 10.3 sees the index-only scan as too expensive
because it thinks most of the table isn't all-visible. Comparing
pg_class.relallvisible values might be informative.
regards, tom lane
