| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Constantin Teodorescu <teo(at)flex(dot)ro>, Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)trust(dot)ee>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Interesting behaviour ! |
| Date: | 1999-07-14 16:39:28 |
| Message-ID: | 26012.931970368@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> But it's more likely that the parser is producing
> int2toint4(var) int4eq int4constant
> in which case it would take some actual intelligence to decide that this
> could and should be converted to the other form.
Hmm, actually it seems to be producing
var int24eq int4constant
My first thought on seeing this was that int24eq didn't have an entry
in pg_amop, but it does. So why doesn't the system realize it can use
an index scan? This might be a relatively simple bug to fix after all,
but it needs more time to find exactly where things are going wrong...
and I have to get some Real Work done...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 1999-07-14 17:17:59 | Re: Arrays versus 'type constant' syntax |
| Previous Message | Michael Richards | 1999-07-14 16:34:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Counting bool flags in a complex query |