On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > My intention was to allow it to consider any covering index. You're > thinking about the cost estimate, which is really entirely different. >
Is there any reason to consider more than one? I would have expected the narrowest one to be the best choice. There's something to be said for using the same index consistently but we already have that problem and make no attempt to do that. And partial indexes might be better but then we would already be considering them if their constraints are satisfied. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
