From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: duplicated index entry found ...
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 19:13:13 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.56.0308051910080.2104@krusty.credativ.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21985.1060092140@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20030805012911.D1434@hub.org>
<21985.1060092140@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane writes:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> > duplicated index entry found, CHARACTER STRINGS LENGTH
> > duplicated index entry found, LENGTH CHARACTER STRINGS
> > duplicated index entry found, SUBSTRING
> > duplicated index entry found, SUBSTRING
> > 4 entries ignored...
>
> Yeah, I've been seeing that for quite some time, but haven't been able
> to figure out what it's complaining about. Surely multiple index
> entries for the same term are legal, so what's its beef?
Since by default (which we don't override) an index entry points to its
nearest containing section (rather than directly to its occurence), if a
section contains the same index entry more than once, it does indeed look
like a duplicate on the outside. There are at least two obvious ways to
get rid of the warnings, but I could never figure out the benefits and
drawbacks of them.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: peter_e@gmx.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, scrappy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: duplicated index entry found ...
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.56.0308051910080.2104@krusty.credativ.de>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox