Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Multifunction Indexes

From: David Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: elein(at)varlena(dot)com
Cc: sfpug(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Multifunction Indexes
Date: 2003-03-15 00:39:53
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: sfpug
On Friday, March 14, 2003, at 04:25  PM, elein wrote:

> As a workaround, push the lower() function into the
> workflow() function. Of course if the workflow doesn't
> always want lower($1) then you'll have to overload or rename it.

Uh, but workflow is a table, not a function.

> I'm don't know  the structures  like Stephen does.
> But if a plain expression parser were used consistently
> it should be able to enable expressions rather
> than single functions.  The expression tree would need
> to be held rather than the function function pointer.
> And of course all of it should be immutable.
> Then again theory is nice, but practice is a whole 'nother
> ball game.

Yes...not sure I understand what you're saying here...perhaps that 
allowing multiple function indexes for function plus column indexes 
should be do-able if the parser understood the syntax properly?



David Wheeler                                     AIM: dwTheory
david(at)kineticode(dot)com                              ICQ: 15726394
                                                Yahoo!: dew7e
                                                Jabber: Theory(at)jabber(dot)org
Kineticode. Setting knowledge in motion.[sm]

In response to


sfpug by date

Next:From: Stephan SzaboDate: 2003-03-15 00:43:58
Subject: Re: Multifunction Indexes
Previous:From: Stephan SzaboDate: 2003-03-15 00:38:54
Subject: Re: Multifunction Indexes

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group