Dawid Kuroczko wrote: >work_mem = 102400 >...I tried tweaking cpu_*, work_mem, effective_cache and so on, but without >any luck.
I'm hoping you didn't tweak it enough! I posted something similar this a while ago, but haven't since got around to figuring out a useful test case to send to the list. Try reducing your work_mem down to 1000 or so and things should start doing what you expect. Sam ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
