"Tarabas (Manuel Rorarius)" <tarabas@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > After removing the enable_seqscan = off and making sure it was gone, > it is a lot faster again. > Now it takes about 469.841 ms for the select. Um, no, enable_seqscan would certainly not have had any effect on the *actual* runtime of this query. All that enable_seqscan = off really does is to add a large constant to the estimated cost of any seqscan, so as to prevent the planner from selecting it unless there is no other alternative plan available. But that has nothing to do with how long the seqscan will really run. If you are seeing a speedup in repeated executions of the same seqscan plan, it's probably just a caching effect. As already noted, it might be worth your while to add an index using the pattern-ops opclass to help with queries like this. regards, tom lane
