| From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: AW: pg_index.indislossy |
| Date: | 2001-05-15 12:40:51 |
| Message-ID: | 3B0123D3.D89E01@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Yea, there is actually some code attached to this vs. the others that
> > had no code at all. Are we ever going to do partial indexes? I guess
> > that is the question.
> The idea is very very good, and since there is an exaple implementation in
> pg 4 it should probably be possible to reimplement. (DB2 has this feature also)
...
> Imho it would be a shame to give up that idea so easily.
Agreed. Another common example is to create an index on all non-null
values of a column.
- Thomas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-05-15 13:50:54 | Re: pg_index.indislossy |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2001-05-15 12:34:39 | AW: pg_index.indislossy |