| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: record identical operator |
| Date: | 2013-09-18 21:09:26 |
| Message-ID: | 523A1686.3040901@2ndQuadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/18/2013 09:19 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> writes:
>> change, but if '1.4' was stored in a column copied into a matview
>> and they later updated the source to '1.40' the increase in
>> accuracy would not flow to the matview. That would be a bug, not a
>> feature.
> Maybe the answer to that use case is to use the seg extension?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/interactive/seg.html
>
> IOW, colour me unconvinced about that binary-equality opclass use case
> in MatViews. We are trusting the btree equality operator about
> everywhere in PostgreSQL and it's quite disturbing to be told that in
> fact we should not trust it.
The problem is, that in this case the simple VIEW and MATVIEW
would yield different results.
--
Hannu Krosing
PostgreSQL Consultant
Performance, Scalability and High Availability
2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2013-09-18 21:13:28 | Re: record identical operator |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2013-09-18 20:28:53 | Re: [PERFORM] encouraging index-only scans |