On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Johann Spies <johann.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 April 2017 at 14:07, Johann Spies <johann.sp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Why would that be? > > To answer my own question. After experimenting a lot we found that > 9.6 uses a parallel seqscan that is actually a lot faster than using > the index on these large tables. > > This, to us was a surprise! > > If you have modern GPU's available, you could try the pg-strom extension - https://github.com/pg-strom/devel It leverages GPU's to further parallelize scans.
