Received: from mta05-svc.ntlworld.com (mta05-svc.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.45])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30FC4474E71
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Sat, 13 Jul 2002 05:53:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from Wilbur ([80.2.246.217]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com
	(InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with SMTP
	id <20020713095312.HKPZ28874.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@Wilbur>
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Sat, 13 Jul 2002 10:53:12 +0100
Message-ID: <000901c22a53$206e0ad0$0500a8c0@Wilbur>
From: "Julian Scarfe" <julian.scarfe@ntlworld.com>
To: <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Indexes with LIKE
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 10:53:23 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Archive-Number: 200207/200
X-Sequence-Number: 8579

I've noticed a difference in behaviour between a server running version 6.x
and one running 7.2.1 in use of indexes with LIKE.

With an index on foo,

WHERE foo LIKE 'bar%'

uses the index (as I would expect it to) on the 6.x box, but uses a
sequential scan (really slow) on the 7.2.1 box.
It's possible that I've set (or failed to set)  a run-time parameter that
controls the behaviour, but I don't know what that might be. ANALYZEing the
table doesn't modify the behaviour.

I can't find any mention of this in the documentation -- any pointers would
be appreciated.

If the above doesn't ring any bells, I'll put together an example.

Many thanks

Julian Scarfe