X-Original-To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F40D475C45 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:31:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from post.webmailer.de (natsmtp00.webmailer.de [192.67.198.74]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35947475BF9 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:31:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from faxdial.hq.factor3.com (ppp-62-245-160-88.mnet-online.de [62.245.160.88]) by post.webmailer.de (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA28748; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:30:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from hq.factor3.com (florian@main.hq.factor3.com [192.168.1.2]) by faxdial.hq.factor3.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h1DGRLh04250; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:27:21 +0100 Message-ID: <3E4BC769.1B1D011F@hq.factor3.com> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:27:21 +0100 From: Florian Wunderlich X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.19 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Bug #866 related problem (ATTN Tom Lane) References: <3E48B6C8.A36E5A92@hq.factor3.com> <8579.1045092421@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200302/51 X-Sequence-Number: 5467 Tom Lane wrote: > > Florian Wunderlich writes: > > So can I be sure that every non-aggregate SELECT on tables joined with > > unique indexes works, independent of the WHERE or ORDER BY? > > I would think that backwards scan on a join mostly doesn't work, but > haven't tried it in any detail.