"Noah M. Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You're right; this is postgres 8.0.8. Perhaps upgrading will solve > this issue. Is there any way to get this query to perform better in > postgres 8.0.8?
You could try reducing random_page_cost, but I'm not sure that will
help much.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
