Re: gin index postgres 9.2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Lucas Possamai <drum(dot)lucas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: gin index postgres 9.2
Date: 2016-05-26 00:09:19
Message-ID: 32122.1464221359@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:42 PM, David G. Johnston <
> david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> What's the query with the revised parentheses?

> Never mind...your right I doubt that it should matter.

The parentheses in the original *definitely* matter, because by default
AND binds more tightly than OR. The larger number of rows in the second
query are perfectly plausible given the parenthesis-omission.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2016-05-26 01:13:10 Re: gin index postgres 9.2
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2016-05-25 23:48:00 Re: gin index postgres 9.2