| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: problematic view definition |
| Date: | 2011-02-20 19:31:46 |
| Message-ID: | 9039.1298230306@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 11:12:01PM +0100, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
>> Unfortunately I do not understand why PostgreSQL says
>>
>> psql:xx.sql:14: ERROR: could not implement UNION
>> DETAIL: Some of the datatypes only support hashing, while others only support sorting.
> The solution lies in these bits:
>> pk_context | integer[] |
> This data type can only be hashed.
>> xmin_message_inbox | xid |
> This data type can only be sorted.
ITYM the other way round, right?
As of 9.1 there will be support for hashing arrays, so this particular
problem should go away without hacks.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | matty jones | 2011-02-20 22:40:01 | multiple tables as a foreign key |
| Previous Message | Reuven M. Lerner | 2011-02-20 16:35:31 | Re: Questions about octal vs. hex for bytea |