As a more exciting counterexample which uses the same domain, consider the space $l_2$, the space of all square-summable sequences. This is essentially an infinite-dimensional analog of our usual euclidean space.
Take our two functions to be $R$ and $L$, the "right shift" and "left shift" operators respectively.
That is to say: $R~:~l_2\to l_2$, given by $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)\mapsto (0,x_1,x_2,x_3,\dots)$
and $L~:~l_2\to l_2$, given by $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)\mapsto (x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5,\dots)$.
You have then: $(L\circ R) (x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)=L(0,x_1,x_2,x_3,\dots) = (x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)$ and so $L\circ R$ is the identity and $L$ is the "left inverse" of $R$.
On the other hand, $(R\circ L)(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)=R(x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5,\dots)=(0,x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)$ which is not the identity in the case $x_1\neq 0$, showing that $L$ is not the right inverse of $R$.