| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Glaesmann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, pgsql-sql <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [NOVICE] Functional index problems. (Was: Many joins: monthly summaries S-L--O--W) |
| Date: | 2003-10-23 00:55:29 |
| Message-ID: | 200310221755.13446.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice pgsql-sql |
Michael,
> My final thought would be to continue using "functional index", noting
> that operators are a special class of function. Out of the above
> description of "value expression", I believe only functions and
> operators are allowed as expressions in the CREATE INDEX syntax,
> correct? (Besides referring to a column.)
Well argued. The problem is Peter's point, which you weren't cc'd on:
>At least it's better than "functional index", because I had always
>wondered where the dysfunctional indexes went. :)
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-23 02:53:58 | Re: Functional index problems. (Was: Many joins: monthly summaries S-L--O--W) |
| Previous Message | Michael Glaesmann | 2003-10-23 00:32:53 | Re: Functional index problems. (Was: Many joins: monthly summaries S-L--O--W) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-23 02:53:58 | Re: Functional index problems. (Was: Many joins: monthly summaries S-L--O--W) |
| Previous Message | Michael Glaesmann | 2003-10-23 00:32:53 | Re: Functional index problems. (Was: Many joins: monthly summaries S-L--O--W) |