Stephen Friedrich wrote:
> Richard Huxton wrote:
>> I don't suppose changing it to:
>> ORDER BY this_.cdr_id, this_.id
>> does anything for you?
>
> Nope. Same cost :-(
Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree then.
Maybe the costs for the index just look wrong.
Hmm - looking at it, this seems the case. Directly querying the
partition it uses the index but estimates a cost of:
cost=0.00..23510.68 rows=575532 width=8907)
The seq-scan says it has a cost of:
cost=0.00..20737.15 rows=575532 width=8907
Could you issue "set enable_seqscan=off" and then show explain analyse
on the second query again?
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd