> Well, drat. Looks like 7.0's query plan is slower :-(. There's
> something fishy about the numbers for 6.5.3 though --- how could it have
> done that query with zero blocks read? Are you sure you are comparing
> apples to apples here? I wonder whether the 6.5 system already had the
> tables cached in kernel disk buffers while 7.0 was working from a
> standing start and had to physically go to the disk.
This is very possible as the 6.5.3 PG is running on the production server
which is constantly being queried.
>Also, did both
> versions have the same -B and -S settings?
I didn't specify any -B or -S settings so both are using their respective
defaults..
Thanks!