Dan Ruthers wrote:
> The index is used!
> I also did a vacuum analyze, and restarted Postgres and it did not
> make any difference. I tried many other ID values (ex 783218 and
> 783220), and they seem to use the index correctly. Only that value
> doesn't.
Possibly, that is the most common value and the cost calculation yields
that it would be more efficient to not use the index. If you disagree,
please show the timings generated by EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
