| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
| Cc: | Atesz <atesz(at)ritek(dot)hu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: An Index Scanning Solution question |
| Date: | 2004-05-20 21:18:49 |
| Message-ID: | 20040520140932.J22962@megazone.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 20 May 2004, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 15:17:01 +0200,
> Atesz <atesz(at)ritek(dot)hu> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to ask why the index scaning can't move on an index in
> > multi-order directions (For exapmle: 1.column: forward, 2.column:
> > backward and 3.column: forward again)? So I wouldn't have to use so many
> > indexes. Has somebody tried to implement this idea in Postgres or is
> > there a more difficult reason in the postgres implementation which
> > cause this defect?
>
> Because there is only one order on an index. So you can only go forward
> and backwards over all of the columns/functions.
If you're willing to make multiple visits you might be able to scan past
and back but I don't know how that'd work for our indexes.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-05-20 21:28:27 | Re: commit messages from gforge -> pgsql-committers |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-05-20 21:11:47 | Re: commit messages from gforge -> pgsql-committers |