Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 48977475D99; Tue,  7 Jan 2003 13:40:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 84FBA475AD7; Tue,  7 Jan 2003 13:40:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h07Idv0U019586;
	Tue, 7 Jan 2003 13:39:57 -0500 (EST)
To: Achilleus Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
Cc: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] [PERFORM] 7.3.1 index use / performance 
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301072034050.9687-100000@matrix.gatewaynet.com> 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301072034050.9687-100000@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Achilleus Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
	message dated "Tue, 07 Jan 2003 20:38:17 -0200"
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 13:39:57 -0500
Message-ID: <19585.1041964797@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517
X-Archive-Number: 200301/248
X-Sequence-Number: 35369

Achilleus Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> writes:
> My case persists:
> After clean install of the database, and after vacuum analyze,
> i get

Um ... is it persisting?  That looks like it's correctly picked the
vcode index this time.  Strange behavior though.  By "clean install"
do you mean you rebuilt Postgres, or just did dropdb/createdb/reload
data?

			regards, tom lane