Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases
Date: 2011-01-04 21:37:46
Message-ID: AANLkTimSzna-1tkQkWoBJUegkG4xNP3QvLR3vKtyNBA3@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> * Existing GIN indexes are upwards compatible so far as on-disk storage
> goes, but they will of course be missing entries for empty, null, or
> null-containing items.  Users who want to do searches that should find
> such items will need to reindex after updating to 9.1.

This is the only part of this proposal that bothers me a little bit.
It would be nice if the system could determine whether a GIN index is
"upgraded from 9.0 or earlier and thus doesn't contain these entries"
- and avoid trying to use the index for these sorts of queries in
cases where it might return wrong answers.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-04 21:49:27 Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-01-04 21:09:17 Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases