On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 23:42:05 -0400,
Madison Kelly <linux@alteeve.com> wrote:
>
> As you probably saw in my last reply, I went back to the old index and
> tried the query you and Tom Lane recommended. Should this not have
> caught the index?
Probably, but there might be some other reason the planner thought it
was better to not use it. Using indexes is not always faster.
It would help to see your latest definition of the table and indexes,
the exact query you used and explain analyze output.
