From: | Evgeniy Shishkin <itparanoia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com>, pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Searching GIN-index (FTS) and sort by timestamp-column |
Date: | 2016-03-16 14:52:40 |
Message-ID: | D77F27E4-3825-454F-B2CC-F91064E2FAF7@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> On 16 Mar 2016, at 16:37, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com> writes:
>> 1. Why isnt' folder_id part of the index-cond?
>
> Because a GIN index is useless for sorting.
I don't see how gin inability to return sorted data relates to index condition.
In fact i tried to reproduce the example,
and if i change folder_id to int from bigint, then index condition with folder_id is used
Index Cond: ((fts_all @@ '''hi'''::tsquery) AND (folder_id = 1))
>
>> 2. Is there a way to make it use the (same) index to sort by
>> received_timestamp?
>
> No.
>
>> 3. Using a GIN-index, is there a way to use the index at all for sorting?
>
> No.
>
>> 4. It doesn't seem like ts_rank uses the index for sorting either.
>
> Same reason.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Evgeniy Shishkin | 2016-03-16 15:04:08 | Re: Searching GIN-index (FTS) and sort by timestamp-column |
Previous Message | Andreas Joseph Krogh | 2016-03-16 14:01:23 | Re: Searching GIN-index (FTS) and sort by timestamp-column |