Nassib Nassar <nas...@renci.org> wrote: > In this example it looks to me like the planner is choosing a Seq > Scan resulting in 18x running time compared to running it with > enable_seqscan = 'off'. I would try these settings: random_page_cost = 2 cpu_tuple_cost = 0.02 Based on your estimated cost versus actual run times, there's a good chance they'll better model your environment, and serve you well in general. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
