William Yu wrote:
There are cases where seqscan will be faster than indexscans. For example, your query to retrieve the latest 25 threads -- always faster using seqscan. If it was using indexscan, that would explain the 9 seconds to run because the HD heads would have to jump back & forth from
Oops, I didn't write down my thoughts clearly. I meant to say -- DEPENDING ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE VALUES -- the query might be faster using seqscan.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
