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

Re: Is indexing broken for bigint columns?

From: "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>
To: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is indexing broken for bigint columns?
Date: 2004-02-24 23:33:52
Message-ID: D90A5A6C612A39408103E6ECDD77B8299CA816@voyager.corporate.connx.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Mascari [mailto:mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 3:27 PM
> To: Dann Corbit
> Cc: PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Is indexing broken for bigint columns?
> 
> 
> Dann Corbit wrote:
> > http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/smith20010821.php3?page=3
> >  
> 
> bigint indexes work fine. The queries probably referenced 32-bit 
> integer constants that were neither quoted nor CAST. I always start 
> bigint sequences at 5 billion. This ensures that client applications 
> aren't assuming 32-bit quantities that will break once ~4.2 billion 
> is reached and I get index scans without quoting or casting free. 
> But IIRC there's a change in the development tree to jettison the 
> requirement for quoting/casting...

I think it would be awfully nice for "conversions that make sense" to
happen implicitly.
Including for function calls.
Including comparison operators.
Etc.

I have had to write a ton of work-around stuff and I still keep finding
holes in it.


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dann CorbitDate: 2004-02-24 23:35:35
Subject: Re: Is indexing broken for bigint columns?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-02-24 23:28:36
Subject: Re: select statement against pg_stats returns inconsistent data

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