"Craig James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Below is the explain/analyze output of the query from each database. Since
> both tables are indexed on the joined columns, I don't understand why the
> big table should be so much slower -- I hoped this would scale well, or at
> least O(log(N)), not O(N
I have the same schema in two different databases. In "smalldb", the two tables of
interest have about 430,000 rows, in "bigdb", the two tables each contain about 5.5
million rows. I'm processing the data, and for various reasons it works out well to process it in
100,000 row chunks. However
