Received: from megazone.bigpanda.com (megazone.bigpanda.com [63.150.15.178]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 752E04758EF for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:33:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D9FEDD60B; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:33:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFA1C5C03; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:33:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:33:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Stephan Szabo To: Daryl Herzmann Cc: Subject: Re: Queries not using Index In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020723172940.C29741-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200207/363 X-Sequence-Number: 8741 On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Daryl Herzmann wrote: > Hi! > > Thanks for the continued help. > > I have attached the results of your request. Thank you! Hmm, when the data was put in, was it put in where the same value would be bunched up? IIRC that's a case the optimizer won't realize if the data isn't ordered but merely bunched together that'd cause it to over-estimate the cost of an index scan. Clustering on the index might help, but cluster drops alot of info about the table, so you have to be careful.