Man <> writes:
> Additional information.
> In 9.6 the second table (lesser tuple) was choosen (the same testdata).
> There are something (cost estimation?) different  in previous versions.

I'd bet on different statistics in the two installations (either you
forgot to ANALYZE, or the random sample came up quite a bit different).
And I'm a little suspicious that these tests weren't all done with the
same work_mem setting.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to