| From: | Sam Z J <sammyjiang721(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: efficiency of wildcards at both ends |
| Date: | 2012-06-20 17:40:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAGeKEGaSHykWJavud+e_xRLkFiLd8Mtc80kZaG+BY_3TYN4VOg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
thank you all for the useful information =D
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Alan Hodgson <ahodgson(at)simkin(dot)ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 01:10:03 PM Sam Z J wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > I'm curious how is wildcards at both ends implemented, e.g. LIKE '%str%'
> > How efficient is it if that's the only search criteria against a large
> > table? how much does indexing the column help and roughly how much more
> > space is needed for the index?
> >
>
> Indexing helps not at all. If the search string starts with a wildcard you
> will always get a sequential scan of the whole table.
>
> Look at the full text search documentation for a better approach.
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>
--
Zhongshi (Sam) Jiang
sammyjiang721(at)gmail(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2012-06-20 17:43:12 | Re: efficiency of wildcards at both ends |
| Previous Message | Alan Hodgson | 2012-06-20 17:39:11 | Re: efficiency of wildcards at both ends |