Re: pg_index.isclustered can work

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_index.isclustered can work
Date: 2001-05-15 13:54:39
Message-ID: 200105151354.f4FDsd701285@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

[ Charset US-ASCII unsupported, converting... ]
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > FYI, the reference to pg_index.indisclustered in ODBC was assuming it
> > meant it was a hash index,
>
> Hmm where could I see it ?
>
> > which is just plain wrong, so that code is
> > not coming back.
> >

It is in info.c, SQLStatistics():

/*
* Clustered index? I think non-clustered should be type
* OTHER not HASHED
*/
set_tuplefield_int2(&row->tuple[6], (Int2) (atoi(isclustered) ?
SQL_INDEX_CLUSTERED : SQL_INDEX_OTHER));

The HASH mention has me confused. Is that code valid? Maybe so. What
does ODBC think the column means, HASH or CLUSTER?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-05-15 14:00:12 Re: optimiser problem
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-05-15 13:50:54 Re: pg_index.indislossy