I don't think so - while the case I posted used a hash index on the
child table, exactly the sane behaviour happens if it is a btree (I
probably should have mentioned that sorry). Background is I discovered
this while playing about with hash indexes...which I must say - someone
has done excellent work on as in this *particular cases* they are
getting me better query performance!
regards
Mark
On 08/01/2026 16:56, David Rowley wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 at 16:34, Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This does seem to be related to parallel planning:
> Isn't it just a case of hash indexes not allowing parallel scans?
>
> David
