On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:36:10PM +0200, Willy-Bas Loos wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Why is it retrieving 3.1 million, when it only needs 17? > > > > > > that's because of the sequential scan, it reads all the data. > > cheers, > > willy-bas Well, the two plans timings were pretty close together. Maybe your cost model is off. Try adjusting the various cost parameters to favor random I/O more. Regards, Ken -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
