From: | "PC Drew" <drewpc(at)ibsncentral(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Marinos J(dot) Yannikos" <mjy(at)geizhals(dot)at>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: (partial?) indexes, LIKE and NULL |
Date: | 2004-01-27 19:51:56 |
Message-ID: | 82CEDAA6A559DB48A373FC3090F2560F35668F@mail.ibsncentral.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
My understanding is that having NULL values in an index breaks it completely. Meaning it won't be used in any query planning. Maybe I'm wrong though...
-----Original Message-----
From: Marinos J. Yannikos [mailto:mjy(at)geizhals(dot)at]
Sent: Tue 1/27/2004 12:26 PM
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc:
Subject: [PERFORM] (partial?) indexes, LIKE and NULL
Hi,
with the following table:
Table "public.foo"
Column | Type | Modifiers
--------+------+-----------
t | text |
Indexes:
"a" btree (t)
Shouldn't queries that use
... where t like '%something%'
benefit from "a" when t is NULL in almost all cases, since the query
planner could use "a" to access the few non-NULL rows quickly? It
doesn't seem to work right now.
(I assume that it would make no difference if the index "a" was partial,
excluding NULLs)
Regards,
-mjy
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-01-27 20:07:33 | Re: On the performance of views |
Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2004-01-27 19:39:21 | Re: On the performance of views |