This is 9.5, sorry I didnt mention that in the initial post. I am guessing
the issue is that the secondary non-indexed criteria is a search through a
Let me know if I can provide any additional info, as I stated I am working
around it with a subquery at the moment. This seems like it may become a
more frequent ad-hoc need so if there is something else I can do it would
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Mike Broers <mbro...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Hello, I am curious about the performance of queries against a master
> > that seem to do seq scans on each child table. When the same query is
> > issued at a partition directly it uses the partition index and is very
> > fast.
> What PG version is that? For me, everything since 9.0 seems to be willing
> to consider the type of plan you're expecting.
> regards, tom lane