Larry Rosenman <ler@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 2013-05-10 09:14, Tom Lane wrote: >> ... and verify you get a cheap plan for each referencing table. > We don't :( Ugh. I bet the problem is that in some of these tables, there are lots and lots of duplicate account ids, such that seqscans look like a good bet when searching for an otherwise-unknown id. You don't see this with a handwritten test for a specific id because then the planner can see it's not any of the common values. 9.2 would fix this for you --- any chance of updating? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
