Tom Lane wrote: > The problem here appears to be a non-random correlation between state > and activity, such that the desired state values are not randomly > scattered in the activity sequence. The planner doesn't know about > that correlation and hence can't predict the poor startup time.
So from when to when is the startup time (the "x" in "x..y") actually measured? When does the clock start ticking and when does it stop? That is what's confusing me.