Re: Questions about indexes with text_pattern_ops

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Kaare Rasmussen" <kaare(at)jasonic(dot)dk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Questions about indexes with text_pattern_ops
Date: 2008-02-25 15:50:36
Message-ID: 27383.1203954636@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Hm, for a simple = or <> I think it doesn't matter which operator class you
> use. For < or > it would produce different answers. Postgres isn't clever enough
> to notice that this is equivalent though so I think you would have to do
> something like (untested):

> CREATE INDEX new_index ON a (b text_pattern_ops) WHERE b ~<>~ '';

> That uses the same operator that the LIKE clause will use for the index range.

I'm intending to get rid of ~=~ and ~<>~ for 8.4; there's no longer any
reason why those slots in the pattern_ops classes can't be filled by the
plain = and <> operators. (There *was* a reason when they were first
invented --- but now that texteq will only return true for exact bitwise
match, I think it's OK to assume these are equivalent.)

In the meantime, though, I think the only way that Kaare's query can use
that index is if he writes
WHERE b LIKE 'whatever' AND b <> '';
(with whatever spelling of <> the index predicate has). There is not
anything in the predicate proving machinery that knows enough about LIKE
to be able to show that "b LIKE 'whatever'" implies "b <> ''".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2008-02-25 16:04:26 Re: [PATCHES] Avahi support for Postgresql
Previous Message Roberts, Jon 2008-02-25 15:47:37 Tuning 8.3