> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> affect that). I would think that a seqscan would be faster for this.
> I would definitely think that the planner would think so --- are you
> forcing enable_seqscan off?
Forgot to answer this-- no, we're not forcing it off. Maybe we need to
force it to use a seqscan for this query?
> Since you're evidently running 7.2, I'd ask for EXPLAIN ANALYZE rather
We are still running 7.2 on this database-- we're in the middle of
acceptance testing for the 7.2.1 upgrade.
-ron