Re: Please correct/improve wiki page about abbreviated keys bug

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Please correct/improve wiki page about abbreviated keys bug
Date: 2016-03-30 03:13:03
Message-ID: 11330.1459307583@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
> Do you think it would be okay if the SQL query to detect potentially
> affected indexes only considered the leading attribute? Since that's
> the only attribute that could use abbreviated keys, it ought to be
> safe to not require users to REINDEX indexes that happen to have a
> second-or-subsequent text/varchar(n) attribute that doesn't use the C
> locale. Maybe it's not worth worrying about.

Sure, if that's the case it seems like a useful thing to know. I'm
sure there are lots of examples of mixed int-and-text columns in
indexes, for example.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2016-03-30 03:14:38 Re: Combining Aggregates
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2016-03-30 02:56:16 Re: pg_restore casts check constraints differently