Re: Index AM change proposals, redux

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index AM change proposals, redux
Date: 2008-04-11 18:49:16
Message-ID: 14842.1207939756@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
> Slightly offtopic. How to get benefit on tuple level ? For example,
> we mark GiST tsearch index as lossy, while for not very big documents it's
> actually exact and we could save a lot not rechecking them.

Won't that just fall out of this? Assuming the consistent() function
knows when the match is exact, it can set the flag properly.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Decibel! 2008-04-11 18:53:11 Re: Separate psql commands from arguments
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-04-11 18:47:26 Re: Remove lossy-operator RECHECK flag?