| From: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com |
| Cc: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pvasickova(at)hotmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Request: set opclass for generated unique and primary key indexes |
| Date: | 2006-02-22 22:53:54 |
| Message-ID: | BAY20-F2301E6373A90AE863D1E56F9FD0@phx.gbl |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > >I seem to recall someone proposing extending the syntax of the UNIQUE
> > >constraints themselves, but there really isn't enough use-case to
> > >justify it AFAICS. Especially not when you can always use CREATE
>UNIQUE
> > >INDEX.
> >
> > I can always use second unique index. But it's redundant. This problem
>is
> > related to using nonC locale.
>
>Why do you need both the unique index with varchar_pattern_ops and one
>with the default ops?
Because LIKE op don't use index on default ops with non C locale. I found it
on tables of czech communities. Primary key is NUTS - 4..6 numbers. I have
to search values with some prefix -> op Like and on primary key can't to use
std. index.
Pavel
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2006-02-22 22:56:42 | Re: Request: set opclass for generated unique and primary |
| Previous Message | Gavin Sherry | 2006-02-22 22:53:03 | Re: Attempting upgrade path; is this possible? |