Rolf =?iso-8859-1?q?=D8stvik?= <rolfostvik@yahoo.no> writes:
> I have a simple query which uses 32ms on 7.4.14 and 1015ms on 8.2.0.
There's something awfully strange about that 8.2 plan --- if it knew
that it'd have to scan all of uut_result_subset (which it should have
known, if the stats were up-to-date), why did it use an indexscan
rather than a seqscan? Are you sure you haven't tweaked any parameters
you didn't tell us about, such as setting enable_seqscan = off?
regards, tom lane
