Hi,
I'm running the same query with "set enable_seqscan = on;" and "set
enable_seqscan = off;":
-> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.00..89642.86 rows=1 width=30) (actual
time=1.612..6924.232 rows=3289 loops=1)
Join Filter: (sys_user.user_id = j_6634.id)
Rows Removed by Join Filter: 14330174
-> Seq Scan on sys_user (cost=0.00..89449.85 rows=1 width=16)
(actual time=0.117..39.802 rows=3289 loops=1)
Filter: ...
-> Seq Scan on cmn_user j_6634 (cost=0.00..138.56 rows=4356
width=22) (actual time=0.001..0.973 rows=4358 loops=3289)
(Full plan: https://explain.depesz.com/s/plAO)
-> Nested Loop Left Join (cost=0.56..89643.52 rows=1 width=30) (actual
time=0.589..39.674 rows=3288 loops=1)
-> Index Scan using sys_user_pkey on sys_user
(cost=0.28..89635.21 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.542..29.435
rows=3288 loops=1)
Filter: ...
-> Index Scan using cmn_user_pkey on cmn_user j_6634
(cost=0.28..8.30 rows=1 width=22) (actual time=0.002..0.002 rows=1
loops=3288)
Index Cond: (sys_user.user_id = id)
(Full plan: https://explain.depesz.com/s/4QXy)
Why optimizer is choosing SeqScan (on cmn_user) in the first query,
instead of an IndexScan, despite of SeqScan being more costly?
Regards,
Vitaliy
