| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Rofail <markm(dot)rofail(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Hans-Jürgen Schönig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays |
| Date: | 2018-04-11 13:29:59 |
| Message-ID: | 20180411132959.xjfiicra2py2fuz3@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Mark Rofail wrote:
> > In particular: it seemed to me that you decided to throw away the idea
> > of the new GIN operator without sufficient evidence that it was
> > unnecessary.
>
> I have to admit to that. But in my defence @> is also GIN indexable so the
> only difference in performance between 'anyarray @>> anyelement' and
> 'anyarray @> ARRAY [anyelement]' is the delay caused by the ARRAY[]
> operation theoretically.
I think I need to review Tom's bounce-for-rework email
https://postgr.es/m/28389.1351094795@sss.pgh.pa.us
to respond to this intelligently. Tom mentioned @> there but there was
a comment about the comparison semantics used by that operator, so I'm
unclear on whether or not that issue has been fixed.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-04-11 13:38:34 | Re: submake-errcodes |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2018-04-11 13:28:18 | Re: lazy detoasting |