| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | AW: pg_index.indislossy |
| Date: | 2001-05-15 12:34:39 |
| Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA6879633682C9@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > > Can someone tell me what we use indislossy for?
Ok, so the interpretation of this field is:
A match in the index needs to be reevaluated in the heap tuple data,
since a match in the index does not necessarily mean, that the heap tuple
matches.
If the heap tuple data matches, the index must always match.
A very typical example for such an index is a hash index. This might explain the
fact, that the ODBC driver misinterpreted that field as meaning that the index is a hash.
The field has nothing to do with partial index.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2001-05-15 12:40:51 | Re: AW: pg_index.indislossy |
| Previous Message | D'Arcy J.M. Cain | 2001-05-15 11:19:01 | Re: [HACKERS] Internet is putting lot of competition fire & heat under Microsoft SQL Server |