Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 566DC47739D; Tue, 7 Jan 2003 13:45:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from jester.senspire.com (unknown [216.208.117.7]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F44F477275; Tue, 7 Jan 2003 13:45:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jester.senspire.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h07IjE39039903; Tue, 7 Jan 2003 13:45:15 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rbt@rbt.ca) Subject: Re: [SQL] 7.3.1 index use / performance From: Rod Taylor To: Tom Lane Cc: Achilleus Mantzios , Stephan Szabo , Pgsql Performance , pgsql-general@postgresql.org, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <14598.1041961456@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <14598.1041961456@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-GwJlq1zAooSOa7CkghQM" Organization: Message-Id: <1041965114.39376.39.camel@jester> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.0 Date: 07 Jan 2003 13:45:14 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200301/47 X-Sequence-Number: 694 --=-GwJlq1zAooSOa7CkghQM Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > I am wondering about a compiler bug, or some other peculiarity on your > platform. Can anyone else using FreeBSD try the above experiment and > see if they get different results from mine on 7.3.* (or CVS tip)? On FreeBSD 4.7 I received the exact same results as Tom using the statements shown by Tom. --=20 Rod Taylor PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc --=-GwJlq1zAooSOa7CkghQM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQA+GyA66DETLow6vwwRAmgbAJoCIJc0hYgyczkGSd8Stdlg64UebgCeNmSg LdAAH0L9w+S1nMDrb+fMrQY= =bljF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-GwJlq1zAooSOa7CkghQM--