Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes:
> On 2013-05-10 09:14, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... and verify you get a cheap plan for each referencing table.
> We don't :(
Ugh. I bet the problem is that in some of these tables, there are lots
and lots of duplicate account ids, such that seqscans look like a good
bet when searching for an otherwise-unknown id. You don't see this
with a handwritten test for a specific id because then the planner can
see it's not any of the common values.
9.2 would fix this for you --- any chance of updating?
regards, tom lane
