On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> The only disadvantage I see of just documenting this is that someone
>> might write a user-defined index opclass that works like this, and
>> they won't be able to use this until at least 9.1 (or at least, not
>> without patching the source).
> I don't actually think that anyone's very likely to write a <>-like index
> operator. It's approximately useless to use an index for such a query.
> Or, to put it differently: if nobody's done that in the past twenty
> years, why is it likely to happen before 9.1?
Hmm. Well suppose we bet a dollar on whether that will happen or not.
In fact, if you promise not to read
make it two dollars.
The Enterprise Postgres Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2010-05-30 02:56:09|
|Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH]: CRC32 is limiting at COPY/CTAS/INSERT ... SELECT + speeding it up|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2010-05-30 02:33:16|
|Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH]: CRC32 is limiting at
COPY/CTAS/INSERT ... SELECT + speeding it up|