do you think it would be a good idea to ask GIN index team to
implement an int-based bitmap set indexing operator for GIN/GiST based
indexes? Or there will be a possibility to somehow optimally index
arrays of enumerations to implement such bitmap structures in 8.3 or
later postgresql versions?
With best regards,
On Sep 17, 3:37 pm, t(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Gritt(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 2:49 AM, in message
> > <1190015368(dot)148293(dot)56(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)y42g2000hsy(dot)googlegroups(dot)com>, valgog
> > <val(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:=20
> >> Are you sure you understood what was the question?
> >> Is the TBL1.CATEGORY = TBL2.CATEGORY the same as TBL1.CATEGORY &
> >> TBL2.CATEGORY > 0?
> > Yes, given that he stipulated that one and only one bit would be set.
> Really? In that case, isn't this bit-field just a bad implementation of
> an enum-style field?
> regards, tom lane
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majord(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-09-18 14:08:39|
|Subject: Re: Query works when kludged, but would prefer "best practice" solution |
|Previous:||From: Galantucci Giovanni||Date: 2007-09-18 07:17:01|
|Subject: R: DELETE queries slow down|