Sushant Sinha <sushant354@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> I guess you could poke the planner towards the bitmap scan by lowering >> the random_page_cost (the default value is 4, I'd say lowering it to 2 >> should do the trick). > The numbers that I gave was after setting random_page_cost = 1.0 After > this I don't know what to do. I think part of the issue here is that the @@ operator is expensive, and so evaluating it once per row is expensive, but the pg_proc.procost setting for it doesn't adequately reflect that. You could experiment with tweaking that setting ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
