On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 03:27:31PM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 12:32:03PM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > > if that index is causing the problem, you may want to consider setting
> > > up partial index to exclude null values.
> > Hey all.
> > Pardon my ignorance. :-)
> > I've been trying to figure out whether null values are indexed or not from
> > the documentation. I was under the impression, that null values are not
> > stored in the index. Occassionally, though, I then see a suggestion such
> > as the above, that seems to indicate to me that null values *are* stored
> > in the index, allowing for the 'exclude null values' to have effect?
> > Which is it? :-)
> I think I'm the ignorant one...do explain on any lookup on an indexed
> field where the field value is null and you get a seqscan.
Nahhh... I think the documentation could use more explicit or obvious
explanation. Or, I could have checked the source code to see. In any case,
I expect we aren't the only ones that lacked confidence.
Tom was kind enough to point out that null values are stored. I expect
that the seqscan is used if the null values are not selective enough,
the same as any other value that isn't selective enough.
Now we can both have a little more confidence! :-)
mark(at)mielke(dot)cc / markm(at)ncf(dot)ca / markm(at)nortel(dot)com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Steinar H. Gunderson||Date: 2005-11-01 02:00:26|
|Subject: Re: 8.1beta3 performance|
|Previous:||From: PostgreSQL||Date: 2005-10-31 23:16:46|
|Subject: 8.1beta3 performance|