| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Brain dump: btree collapsing |
| Date: | 2003-02-28 19:51:49 |
| Message-ID: | 5806.1046461909@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> not being able to use constants in functional indexes is a giant pain as
> well.
ISTM the appropriate way to attack this is to replace "functional
indexes" with "expressional indexes", wherein the value indexed
is anything that can be computed by a simple scalar expression (no
aggregates, no sub-selects, only immutable functions/operators).
This'd be a direct superset of what we can do now.
I haven't studied it in detail but I think this would not be a
terribly large project.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-28 20:17:19 | Re: result relation used anymore? |
| Previous Message | Brandon Craig Rhodes | 2003-02-28 18:17:30 | result relation used anymore? |