Re: AW: pg_index.indislossy

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: AW: pg_index.indislossy
Date: 2001-07-09 18:35:49
Message-ID: 200107091835.f69IZnx08978@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Added to pg_index.h file as a comment.

>
> > > > Can someone tell me what we use indislossy for?
>
> Ok, so the interpretation of this field is:
> A match in the index needs to be reevaluated in the heap tuple data,
> since a match in the index does not necessarily mean, that the heap tuple
> matches.
> If the heap tuple data matches, the index must always match.
>
> A very typical example for such an index is a hash index. This might explain the
> fact, that the ODBC driver misinterpreted that field as meaning that the index is a hash.
> The field has nothing to do with partial index.
>
> Andreas
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-07-09 19:57:19 Re: grant and SQL92
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2001-07-09 17:09:03 Re: AW: New SQL Datatype RECURRINGCHAR