Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases
Date: 2011-01-08 00:19:30
Message-ID: 4049.1294445970@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> We (PGX) actually have a client who could use this. Tom, if you have patches as you work on this (or, better, a branch in a Git repo), I could do some testing on your client's code with it. It would involve converting from a GiST to a GIN index and then seeing how well the queries fare. Would that be helpful to you?

Well, actually, I just committed it. If you want to test, feel free.
Note that right now only the anyarray && <@ @> operators are genuinely
fixed ... I plan to hack on tsearch and contrib pretty soon though.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-08 01:08:38 Remove pg_am.amindexnulls?
Previous Message David E. Wheeler 2011-01-08 00:13:37 Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases