Magers, James, 14.07.2014 04:20: > Thank you for your feedback. I am attaching the requested information. > While I do not think the query is necessarily inefficient, I believe a sequence scan would be more efficient. You can try set enable_indexscan = off; set enable_bitmapscan = off; and then run your query. But I would be very surprised if a seq scan (which reads through the whole table) was faster than those 4ms you have now
