| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Sergey Koshcheyev" <sergey(dot)p(dot)k(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #1510: Indexes on boolean fields |
| Date: | 2005-02-27 16:49:34 |
| Message-ID: | 12059.1109522974@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
"Sergey Koshcheyev" <sergey(dot)p(dot)k(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> this is an addition to my bug report #1470. I have found that if I have a
> boolean column and create an index on it, it doesn't get picked up for
> conditions like "WHERE column" or "WHERE NOT column", only "WHERE column =
> true" or "WHERE column = false".
> Do you consider this worth fixing?
No; mainly because a btree index on a boolean column is ordinarily a
waste of disk space.
A partial index (with some non-boolean column as the nominally indexed
data) is generally a better solution.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2005-02-27 17:06:03 | Re: BUG #1502: hash_seq_search might return removed entry |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-27 16:45:34 | Re: BUG #1502: hash_seq_search might return removed entry |