"Noah M. Daniels" <ndaniels@mac.com> writes:
> You're right; this is postgres 8.0.8. Perhaps upgrading will solve
> this issue. Is there any way to get this query to perform better in
> postgres 8.0.8?

You could try reducing random_page_cost, but I'm not sure that will
help much.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq