Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: duplicated index entry found ...

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: duplicated index entry found ...
Date: 2003-08-05 17:13:13
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.56.0308051910080.2104@krusty.credativ.de (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
Tom Lane writes:

> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > duplicated index entry found, CHARACTER STRINGS LENGTH
> > duplicated index entry found, LENGTH CHARACTER STRINGS
> > duplicated index entry found, SUBSTRING
> > duplicated index entry found, SUBSTRING
> > 4 entries ignored...
>
> Yeah, I've been seeing that for quite some time, but haven't been able
> to figure out what it's complaining about.  Surely multiple index
> entries for the same term are legal, so what's its beef?

Since by default (which we don't override) an index entry points to its
nearest containing section (rather than directly to its occurence), if a
section contains the same index entry more than once, it does indeed look
like a duplicate on the outside.  There are at least two obvious ways to
get rid of the warnings, but I could never figure out the benefits and
drawbacks of them.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Joseph ShraibmanDate: 2003-08-06 00:51:05
Subject: pg 7.4beta1 doc bug: vacuum not updated
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2003-08-05 17:09:54
Subject: Re: man pages for v7.4 ... ?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group