Re: seq scan woes

On 7 Jun 2004 at 18:49, Dan Langille wrote:

> On 7 Jun 2004 at 16:38, Rod Taylor wrote:
> >       * random_page_cost (good disks will bring this down to a 2 from a
> >         4)
>
> I've got mine set at 4.  Increasing it to 6 gave me a 1971ms query.
> At 3, it was a 995ms.  Setting it to 2 gave me a 153ms query.
>
> How interesting.

The explain analyse: http://rafb.net/paste/results/pWhHsL86.html
--
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
BSDCan - http://www.bsdcan.org/