Moshe Jacobson <moshe@neadwerx.com> writes:
> My problem is that the exact same simple query performs great in the
> original database ("ises") and dismally in the copy database
> ("ises_coelacanth"). The problem is that in ises, it uses an index scan,
> but in ises_coelacanth it uses a sequential scan:
The rowcount estimates are much further away from reality in the second
database. Either you forgot to run ANALYZE at all, or the stats target
settings are different (and lower) in the second DB.
regards, tom lane
