From: | Edson Richter <edsonrichter(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: What is impact of "varchar_opts"? |
Date: | 2013-01-21 20:12:06 |
Message-ID: | BLU0-SMTP273E0E3A302CA4271424515CF170@phx.gbl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Em 21/01/2013 18:03, Tom Lane escreveu:
> Edson Richter <edsonrichter(at)hotmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I see. So, what is the overhead of having text_ops in opclass?
>> Can I define it as default for all my indexes when textual type of any kind?
> Why are you intent on defining anything? IMO, best practice is to let
> the database choose the opclass, unless you have a very good and
> specific reason to choose a non-default one for a particular index.
> Letting it default is way more future-proof than specifying something.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
Thanks, but I've found that some queries using LIKE operator uses table
scan instead index unless it is defined with varchar_ops in the index...
That make a huge difference when querying tables with millions of
objects (indexed vs table scan). And I can't avoid the LIKE operator...
Example:
select * from notafiscal where cnpj like '01234568%'
Is there other way I'm missing?
Thanks,
Edson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-01-21 20:36:09 | Re: What is impact of "varchar_opts"? |
Previous Message | Tim Uckun | 2013-01-21 20:09:31 | Re: Running update in chunks? |