Bill Moran wrote > On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 17:20:57 +0100 > Rebecca Clarke <
> r.clarke83@ > > wrote: > > Note that this is speculation on my part, but the > point being that if those columns are usually as narrow as your > examples you might want to try changing them to VARCHAR(50) or > something and see if the planner is more willing to use the > indexes at that point. > > A lot of this is pure speculation on my part ... hope that it's > helpful and doesn't lead you in the wrong direction. The presence of absence of the length limiter on a varchar will not impact the query plan. And I'm pretty sure you cannot even store a too long varchar in an index. It will error on the attempt (as opposed to truncating). David J. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Index-usage-with-slow-query-tp5812503p5812862.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
