Magers, James, 14.07.2014 04:20:
> Thank you for your feedback. I am attaching the requested information.
> While I do not think the query is necessarily inefficient, I believe a sequence scan would be more efficient.
You can try
set enable_indexscan = off;
set enable_bitmapscan = off;
and then run your query.
But I would be very surprised if a seq scan (which reads through the whole table) was faster than those 4ms you have
now
