| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Georgios <gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <julien(dot)rouhaud(at)free(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Supporting = operator in gin/gist_trgm_ops |
| Date: | 2020-11-15 23:13:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1zxfA8_MGBW6sJMj54p8nPoe4bMb5LoG-rMYZVPq4j08Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 12:31 AM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> I went through and revised this patch. I made the documentation
> statement less categorical. pg_trgm gist/gin indexes might have lower
> performance of equality operator search than B-tree. So, we can't
> claim the B-tree index is always not needed. Also, simple comparison
> operators are <, <=, >, >=, and they are not supported.
>
Is "simple comparison" here a well-known term of art? If I read the doc as
committed (which doesn't include the sentence above), and if I didn't
already know what it was saying, I would be left wondering which
comparisons those are. Could we just say "inequality operators"?
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-11-16 00:20:16 | Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM |
| Previous Message | Victor Yegorov | 2020-11-15 22:29:08 | Re: Deleting older versions in unique indexes to avoid page splits |