Re: [BUGS] Sequential Scan Index Bug

2004-04-08 Thread Gabriel Weinberg
looking for something like 4.345. Gabriel _ Gabriel Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Stephan Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 11:35 AM To: Gabriel Weinberg Cc: 'Bruno Wolff III'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:

Re: [BUGS] Sequential Scan Index Bug

2004-04-08 Thread Gabriel Weinberg
that I think of it, 4 is different than 4.0 in terms of precision. If you are querying an intcol, maybe that doesn't matter, but I would probably err on the side of precaution and throw a type mismatch error as well. Gabriel _____ Gabriel Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -

Re: [BUGS] Sequential Scan Index Bug

2004-04-07 Thread Gabriel Weinberg
. In my case, the table is huge, so it really put a hamper on the system. Gabriel _ Gabriel Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Bruno Wolff III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 1:38 AM To: Gabriel Weinberg Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED

[BUGS] Sequential Scan Index Bug

2004-04-05 Thread Gabriel Weinberg
decimal, e.g. select * from table where id=4.343, it skips the index entirely and does a sequential scan of the table. I am using v7.4.2 on Freebsd 4.9. Gabriel _ Gabriel Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the