> Playing around with seq_page_cost (1) and random_page_cost (1), I can get > the correct index selected. Applying those same settings to our production > server does not produce the optimal plan, though.
I doubt setting seq_page_cost and random_page_cost to the same value is reasonable - random access is almost always more expensive than sequential access. Anyway, post the EXPLAIN ANALYZE output from the production server. Don't forget there are other _cost values - try to modify them too, but I'm not sure how these values relate to the bitmap heap scan / bitmap index plans. regards Tomas -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
