Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxx> writes: > -> Bitmap Index Scan on large_rel_1_field_1 (cost=0.00..2003.09 rows=193739 width=0) (actual time=0.148..0.148 rows=12 loops=1) > Index Cond: (n.field_1 = "outer".field_2) What you need to look into is why that rowcount estimate is off by four orders of magnitude. The estimate on the smaller table is only off by a factor of 75 but that's still pretty darn awful. Are the statistics up to date? Maybe larger stats targets would help. regards, tom lane
