Nando Dessena wrote:

>
> All in all I don't see a problem with the feature, I don't even see it
> as a feature, but merely the removal of a limit on index size that
> Firebird does carry and others don't.

Yes, from user's point of view, it may *looks* like a limit removal, but
it is NOT, it's different type of index altogether (don't get fooled
that it's still a B-tree), with different characteristics. If it would
be ever accepted, I would be strongly against implementation that would
not require explicit declaration when this index should be used, and
would use normal index definition syntax with some magic number for key
size when things would start to work differently.

best regards
Pavel Cisar
IBPhoenix