Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8352E0193 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 20:03:53 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 47390-05 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 20:03:44 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from el-out-1112.google.com (el-out-1112.google.com [209.85.162.179]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759F02E0199 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 20:03:50 -0400 (AST) Received: by el-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id r27so1156429ele.5 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:03:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=oW698Fk2mGuNsHJek3GVE1XBAwECWKZyj8c9FsVfaFQ=; b=F3/mYZpR/D9C4XLqoC5oKlY0dj78vy35fhza3a7+U4kf8fXnS4SnIhZ+1GtE51CLi9uw5yAvgoBE/5rEjeu3GLBE/jsa5Qc0QCblZTQpbGV+5Hw2x8XheCuu/Z7X/v5eu32XVAPJCnZGOP5eObCv4u81erDfhMzip0o+g2KfNSU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ooRnVRsVAekY3wetq3NjO7PIqrARhD+ig2G2VgFYOqQylvGXfJJu5IuaAEyPNirfnFQ0ZJf44dRY3deaZLwdrFLk1o8Nk7JL7WOCqnVA1V6qYndTi1MM+/B7eF7jGsMBuT00VvybyC174twszI6HN8euAi0K6mBwl/emFY3xTtw= Received: by 10.115.54.1 with SMTP id g1mr2628755wak.132.1203897828725; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:03:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.133.6 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:03:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:03:48 -0600 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Sean Leach" Subject: Re: Weird issue with planner choosing seq scan Cc: "Stephen Denne" , pgsql-performance In-Reply-To: <7EA909F9-92E9-4B36-9476-59A0A14A1F86@wiggum.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <5289.1203875431@sss.pgh.pa.us> <7ECB45D8-33ED-45FC-A0DA-D3DE25B6CC8E@wiggum.com> <6253.1203880225@sss.pgh.pa.us> <7EA909F9-92E9-4B36-9476-59A0A14A1F86@wiggum.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200802/311 X-Sequence-Number: 28853 The fact that your indexes are bloated but your table is not makes me wonder if you're not running a really old version of pgsql that had problems with monotonically increasing indexes bloating over time and requiring reindexing. That problem has been (for the most part) solved by some hacking Tom Lane did some time back. What version pgsql is this? If it's pre 8.0 it might be worth looking into migrating for performance and maintenance reasons.