[ woops, accidentally replied off-list, trying again ] On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Maria L. Wilson <maria.l.wilso...@nasa.gov> wrote: > thanks for taking a look at this.... and it's never too late!! > > I've tried bumping up work_mem and did not see any improvements - > All the indexes do exist that you asked.... see below.... > Any other ideas? > > CREATE INDEX invsnsr_idx1 > ON invsensor > USING btree > (granule_id); > > CREATE INDEX invsnsr_idx2 > ON invsensor > USING btree > (sensor_id);
What about a composite index on both columns? > CREATE UNIQUE INDEX granver_idx1 > ON gran_ver > USING btree > (granule_id); It's a bit surprising to me that this isn't getting used. How big are these tables, and how much memory do you have, and what values are you using for seq_page_cost/random_page_cost/effective_cache_size? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
