"Jim 'Decibel!' Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How on earth did the seqscan suddenly take 4x longer? And why is the > subquery scan then doubling the amount of time again?
Maybe the disk access is less sequential because of the need to fetch
the other table too?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
