| From: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, "Craig O'Shannessy" <craig(at)ucw(dot)com(dot)au>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: int8 primary keys still not using index without manual |
| Date: | 2003-11-08 19:32:58 |
| Message-ID: | 3FAD44EA.3060601@Yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Th big picture is that it doesn't work very well to assume that indexes
>>> only need to handle same-datatype comparisons. I think we are
>>> ultimately going to have to address that issue more-or-less directly.
>
>> Wouldn't that logically lead to an "abstract" operator class to be
>> pointed to in the original indexes operator class?
>
> I've just posted a proposal in pgsql-hackers that attacks the problem
> a little differently: put the cross-type operators directly into the
> opclass.
I like that approach even better than mine. It needs less work during
the actual planning.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2003-11-08 19:37:26 | Re: Referencing columns from system tables possible? |
| Previous Message | Holger Marzen | 2003-11-08 19:22:49 | Re: Power Electrical Down!!!!! |