"Markus Stocker" <markus@wilabs.ch> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> 2/ Sequential scans seem to me more expensive compared to index scans.
>>> I'm wondering why the sequential scan on individual_name is the first
>>> executed in the plan.
>>
>> I was wondering that too; it looks like it should be a candidate for an
>> index search. Datatype problem maybe? Again, you've not shown us the
>> table definitions...
> I guess this is explained too now, at least partially.
No, I meant it seemed like that should have been an indexscan; fetching
one row via an index should have an estimated cost much less than 400.
What do you get if you just do
explain select * from individual_name where name = 'http://www.University0.edu'
If it still says seqscan, what if you force it with
set enable_seqscan = off?
regards, tom lane
