Re: Very slow updates when using IN syntax subselect

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bryce Nesbitt <bryce1@obviously.com> writes:
>   
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>     
>>> What does EXPLAIN show for this and for the base query?
>>>       
>        
>   
>>    ->  Seq Scan on event  (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=1 width=408)
>>          Filter: (reconciled = false)
>>     
>
>   
>> select count(*) from event;
>> -----------
>>  116226
>>     
>
> It seems pretty clear that you've never vacuumed nor analyzed these
> tables ... else the planner would have some clue about their sizes.
> Do that and then see what you get.
>   
They occur in fine time.  That's good, thanks.  But jeeze, can't
postgres figure this out for itself?