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

Re: BUG #6530: intarray documentation could do with a warning about operators

From: Kasper Sandberg <kontakt(at)sandberg-consult(dot)dk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #6530: intarray documentation could do with a warning about operators
Date: 2012-04-09 16:21:56
Message-ID: 4F830CA4.8090808@sandberg-consult.dk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
yes, I could not figure out why my GIN index was not used, this is what 
i meant.

On 09/04/12 18:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>  writes:
>> We do have this:
>>    <para>
>>     The operators<literal>&amp;&amp;</>,<literal>@&gt;</>  and
>>     <literal>&lt;@</>  are equivalent to<productname>PostgreSQL</>'s built-in
>>     operators of the same names, except that they work only on integer arrays
>>     that do not contain nulls, while the built-in operators work for any array
>>     type.  This restriction makes them faster than the built-in operators
>>     in many cases.
>>    </para>
>> But maybe some more explicit warning is needed.  Not sure exactly what.
> I think the gripe is basically that, while these operators might be
> equivalent to the built-in ones as far as results go, they are not
> equivalent in terms of their ability to match to indexes.  But not
> sure how we turn that observation into useful documentation.
>
> 			regards, tom lane


-- 
Kasper Sandberg
Sandberg Enterprises
+45 51944242
http://www.sandbergenterprises.dk


In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2012-04-09 18:13:10
Subject: Re: BUG #6528: pglesslog still referenced in docs, but no 9.1 support
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-04-09 16:16:29
Subject: Re: BUG #6530: intarray documentation could do with a warning about operators

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