Re: contrib/intarray (was Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: contrib/intarray (was Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases)
Date: 2011-01-08 22:49:43
Message-ID: 18540.1294526983@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There seem to be three ways
>> in which intarray is simpler/faster than the generic operators:
>>
>> * restricted to integer arrays
>> * restricted to 1-D arrays
>> * doesn't allow nulls in the arrays

> My understanding is that they also perform much better if the values in an integer array are ordered. Does that matter?

Some of the operations sort the array contents as an initial step. I'm
not sure how much faster they'll be if the array is already ordered,
but in any case they don't *require* presorted input.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2011-01-08 23:06:14 Re: WIP: Range Types
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2011-01-08 22:37:06 Re: Wildcard search support for pg_trgm