Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rusty Conover <rconover(at)infogears(dot)com>
Cc: psql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays
Date: 2009-02-12 20:54:16
Message-ID: 16433.1234472056@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Rusty Conover <rconover(at)infogears(dot)com> writes:
> Since 100% of my queries are for retrieval, I should use GIN but it
> never appears to be used unlike how GIST indexes are:

You haven't shown us either the table or the index declaration,
so it's a bit tough to comment on that. It's worth noting though
that your GIST example appears to rely on a nonstandard operator class.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rusty Conover 2009-02-12 21:05:02 Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays
Previous Message SHARMILA JOTHIRAJAH 2009-02-12 20:51:38 Re: Good Delimiter for copy command

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rusty Conover 2009-02-12 21:05:02 Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays
Previous Message Rusty Conover 2009-02-12 20:09:14 GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays