Is the int8_ops being implimented?

From: Ryan Bradetich <rbrad(at)hpb50023(dot)boi(dot)hp(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Is the int8_ops being implimented?
Date: 1999-02-15 02:53:42
Message-ID: 199902150253.TAA27551@hpb50023.boi.hp.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello hackers...

I tried this with version 6.4.2 and the current development tree.

ryan=> create table test (test int8 PRIMARY KEY);
NOTICE: CREATE TABLE/PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index test_pkey for table test
ERROR: Can't find a default operator class for type 20.

I also tried this:

ryan=> create table test (i int8);
CREATE
ryan=> create index test_pkey on test (i);
ERROR: Can't find a default operator class for type 20.

and this:

ryan=> create index test_pkey on test using btree (i int8_ops);
ERROR: DefineIndex: int8_ops class not found

Finally I tried to cast it to an int4_ops to see what happened:

ryan=> create unique index test_pkey on test using btree (i int4_ops);
CREATE

looks good but...

ryan=> insert into test values (5);
INSERT 1133758 1

ryan=> insert into test values (5);
INSERT 1133759 1

ryan=> select * from test;
i
-
5
5
(2 rows)

Doesn't look quite right to me. If no-one else is working on this, maybe
this would be a good project for me to look into.

- Ryan

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vadim Mikheev 1999-02-15 03:02:44 Re: [HACKERS] bushy plans
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-02-15 02:38:43 Re: [HACKERS] bushy plans