> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> > Limit (cost=22669.68..22669.68 rows=95 width=372)
> > -> Sort (cost=22669.68..22669.68 rows=96 width=372)
> > -> Index Scan using agentresults2_modified_user,
> > agentresults2_modified_user, agentresults2_modified_user on
> agentresults
> > (cost=0.00..22666.52 rows=96 width=372)
>
> Should I guess from the index name that it is on (modified,
> 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 Mäkelä
