Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rusty Conover <rconover(at)infogears(dot)com>
Cc: psql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays
Date: 2009-02-12 20:54:16
Message-ID: 16433.1234472056@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
Rusty Conover <rconover(at)infogears(dot)com> writes:
> Since 100% of my queries are for retrieval, I should use GIN but it  
> never appears to be used unlike how GIST indexes are:

You haven't shown us either the table or the index declaration,
so it's a bit tough to comment on that.  It's worth noting though
that your GIST example appears to rely on a nonstandard operator class.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Rusty ConoverDate: 2009-02-12 21:05:02
Subject: Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays
Previous:From: Rusty ConoverDate: 2009-02-12 20:09:14
Subject: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Rusty ConoverDate: 2009-02-12 21:05:02
Subject: Re: GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays
Previous:From: SHARMILA JOTHIRAJAHDate: 2009-02-12 20:51:38
Subject: Re: Good Delimiter for copy command

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group