Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1019475CED
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 06:51:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ringhals.neutron.se (unknown [213.136.41.129])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DBDB475CE7
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 06:51:40 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <D1045567F50DD311AB1B00508B3188E9026546E7@RINGHALS>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jimmy_M=E4kel=E4?= <jimmy.makela@agent25.se>
To: 'Tom Lane' <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Pgsql-Sql (E-mail)" <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Unique indexes not unique? 
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:52:50 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517
X-Archive-Number: 200301/297
X-Sequence-Number: 11162

> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> > Limit  (cost=3D22669.68..22669.68 rows=3D95 width=3D372)
> >   ->  Sort  (cost=3D22669.68..22669.68 rows=3D96 width=3D372)
> >         ->  Index Scan using agentresults2_modified_user,
> > agentresults2_modified_user, agentresults2_modified_user on=20
> agentresults
> > (cost=3D0.00..22666.52 rows=3D96 width=3D372)
>=20
> Should I guess from the index name that it is on (modified,=20
> usr) and not
> on (usr, modified)?  If so, the problem is that the OR-expansion code

Sorry for the late answer, was out of town for the week.
Yes this is the case, and in my case I wouldn't want to change the order.

Sure it would be nice to support this case too, but not if it implies
penalties for more typical queries. Doing the expansion manually isn't
that hard (but quite ugly).

Thanks for all answers.

Regards,
Jimmy M=E4kel=E4