Received: from postgresql.org.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
	by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5BClUE56446
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 08:47:30 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org)
Received: from news.tht.net (news.hub.org [216.126.91.242])
	by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f54LwVE44752
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 17:58:31 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from news@news.tht.net)
Received: (from news@localhost) by news.tht.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id
 f54LkuI73995
	for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 17:46:56 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from news)
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hans=2DJ=FCrgen=20Sch=F6nig?= <hs@cybertec.at>
X-Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.sql
Subject: Re: select distinct too slow
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 23:45:10 +0200
Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3B1C0166.FC3E4CF5@cybertec.at>
References: <20010601123641.4c0d96c0.gry@ll.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: scrappy@hub.org
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [de] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200106/152
X-Sequence-Number: 3373

Did you vacuum analyse your table after creating the index?
A solution for your problem would be to turn sequential scans ofd before querying the table.
This should work somehow like that:

myjava=# SET enable_seqscan TO 'off';
SET VARIABLE
myjava=# show enable_seqscan;
NOTICE:  enable_seqscan is off
SHOW VARIABLE

check out the docs for further information.

    Hans