| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> |
| Subject: | Re: GIN vs. Partial Indexes |
| Date: | 2010-10-23 19:01:21 |
| Message-ID: | 4CC33101.1000205@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/08/2010 02:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> In any case, I would expect that GIN could actually do this quite
>> efficiently. What we'd probably want is a concept of a "null word",
>> with empty indexable rows entered in the index as if they contained the
>> null word. So there'd be just one index entry with a posting list of
>> however many such rows there are.
So, given the lack of objections to this idea, do we have a plan for
fixing GIN?
--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | A.M. | 2010-10-23 19:47:01 | create c function with void argument bug? |
| Previous Message | Jesper Krogh | 2010-10-23 17:55:14 | Re: window function count(*) and limit |