Re: Spatial join insists on sequential scan of larger table

Clive Page <cgp@star.le.ac.uk> writes:
> This executes, it need hardly be said, a whole lot faster.

Could we see EXPLAIN ANALYZE output?

The estimated costs for the two cases are nearly the same, which says to
me that there's something wrong with the cost model for r-tree lookups,
but I don't know what it is.

            regards, tom lane