Yes, I had done UNION. UNION ALL achives the expected plan and speed! Thank you!
BTW, this is interesting, because there are only about 5 or 6 rows max returned from both queries - but I guess the planner expects more and hence changes the plan to remove duplicates.
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 9:05 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Robert James<srobertjames@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Did you try union, or union all?
> UNION was better, but still 5 times as slow as either query done
> individually.
> set enable_seqscan=off didn't help at all - it was totally ignored
> Is there anything else I can do?
