Re: int8 primary keys still not using index without manual

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, "Craig O'Shannessy" <craig(at)ucw(dot)com(dot)au>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: int8 primary keys still not using index without manual
Date: 2003-11-08 17:49:03
Message-ID: 12635.1068313743@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Th big picture is that it doesn't work very well to assume that indexes
>> only need to handle same-datatype comparisons. I think we are
>> ultimately going to have to address that issue more-or-less directly.

> Wouldn't that logically lead to an "abstract" operator class to be
> pointed to in the original indexes operator class?

I've just posted a proposal in pgsql-hackers that attacks the problem
a little differently: put the cross-type operators directly into the
opclass.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Holger Marzen 2003-11-08 19:22:49 Re: Power Electrical Down!!!!!
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-11-08 17:45:24 Re: PostgreSQL, Postgre and Apple