| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ctid ranges |
| Date: | 2012-06-13 21:00:10 |
| Message-ID: | 16481.1339621210@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 03:21:17PM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> IMNSHO, it's a no-brainer for the todo (but I think it's more
>> complicated than adding some comparisons -- which are working now):
> I see. Seems we have to add index smarts to those comparisons. That
> might be complicated.
Uh, the whole point of a TID scan is to *not* need an index.
What would be needed is for tidpath.c to let through more kinds of TID
comparison quals than it does now, and then for nodeTidscan.c to know
what to do with them. The latter logic might well look something like
btree indexscan qual preparation, but it wouldn't be the same code.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gauthier, Dave | 2012-06-13 22:25:50 | Passing master tag around in a multi-site master-slave system |
| Previous Message | Little, Douglas | 2012-06-13 20:42:40 | composite type use in pl/gpsql |