From: | Matteo Beccati <php(at)beccati(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Enhanced containment selectivity function |
Date: | 2006-05-12 08:02:08 |
Message-ID: | 44644100.2090705@beccati.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Hi,
Bruce Momjian ha scritto:
> Uh, I just moved the selectivity function over to /contrib/ltree, and
> moved what I needed, so it now works. You can continue with the plan
> above, or I can.
I've just been able to install a 8.2-devel to test the ltree selectivity
improvements I suggested.
It was a big surprise having no improvements at all in the query I used
for all my previous tests, until I found out that the test against
histogram values was removed by Tom. I strongly think it should be
reintroduced: ltree columns are likely to have a unique constraint and
the current ltreeparentsel function will behave just like contsel in
these cases.
Here is the commit:
> Log Message:
> -----------
> Fix ltreeparentsel so it actually works ...
>
> Modified Files:
> --------------
> pgsql/contrib/ltree:
> ltree_op.c (r1.10 -> r1.11)
> (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/contrib/ltree/ltree_op.c.diff?r1=1.10&r2=1.11)
>
Best regards
--
Matteo Beccati
http://phpadsnew.com
http://phppgads.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Campbell | 2006-05-12 08:14:29 | Re: Compiling on 8.1.3 on Openserver 5.05 |
Previous Message | Mario Weilguni | 2006-05-12 07:16:44 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Qingqing Zhou | 2006-05-12 09:57:58 | Re: [PATCH] Improve EXPLAIN ANALYZE overhead by sampling |
Previous Message | Mario Weilguni | 2006-05-12 07:16:44 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |