"Greg Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> -> Index Scan using i_oa_2_00_dt_for on t_oa_2_00_dt dt (cost=0.00..5.31
>> rows=1 width=8) (actual time=1.264..1.264 rows=0 loops=50)
>> Index Cond: (dt.card_id = c.id)
>> Filter: ((_to >= 1500) AND (_from <= 1550))
>> Total runtime: 3399960.277 ms
> Also, are 1500 and 1550 user-supplied parameters or are they part of a small
> set of possible values? You could consider having a partial index on "card_id
> WHERE _to >= 1500 AND _from <= 1550". The numbers don't even have to match
> exactly as long as they include all the records the query needs.
That side of the join isn't where the problem is, though.
If you're willing to invent new indexes, one on ecp,nctr,nctn,ncts,rvel
would probably fix the performance issue very nicely.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
