Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (davinci.ethosmedia.com [209.10.40.250])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF6D475D17
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 14:12:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO chocolate-mousse)
	by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9)
	with ESMTP id 1583575; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 11:12:45 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com
Organization: Aglio Database Solutions
To: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Subject: Re: Two Index Questions
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 11:12:49 -0700
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
References: <200207190933.59283.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200207191028.18547.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<20020719175638.GA14836@wolff.to>
In-Reply-To: <20020719175638.GA14836@wolff.to>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <200207191112.49885.josh@agliodbs.com>
X-Archive-Number: 200207/307
X-Sequence-Number: 8685

Bruno, Tom,

> Typo. I meant to say columns. The issue is that max doesn't use an index,
> but if there are a lot of different values of G for a given A, B and C,
> it may be better to use an index then to search through the applicable
> rows to find the maximum.

That's odd ... you're correct.   Tom, why doesn't MAX() use an index?   I=
=20
understand why indexes are generally useless for SUM(), AVG, and COUNT, but=
=20
it seems that MAX() and MIN() should *always* use an index.

--=20
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco