>Just as a follow-up, can you post the structure of the 2 tables, and the expressions for all the indexes (when you use the 2nd scenario on the right)
>
>Even though the second one probably has a slight edge, there's a hash join that's one of the more expensive operators. Wondering if that can be avoided while still getting the two index seeks. I'm not sure, but want to give it a quick look.

The command received was a composed code example of something which was just to give an example. So, in my real time, I have a command which is much bigger than than with various table names and such.