On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Alessandro Gagliardi <alessandro@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hm. Well, it looks like setting enable_seqscan=false is session specific, so > it seems like I can use it with this query alone; but it sounds like even if > that works, it's a bad practice. (Is that true?) Yep > My effective_cache_size is 1530000kB Um... barring some really bizarre GUC setting, I cannot imagine how it could be preferring the sequential scan. Maybe some of the more knowedgeable folks has a hint. In the meanwhile, you can use the seqscan stuff on that query alone. Be sure to use it on that query alone - ie, re-enable it afterwards, or discard the connection. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
