Re: How to get around LIKE inefficiencies?

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: How to get around LIKE inefficiencies?
Date: 2000-11-06 03:34:11
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.21.0011052332540.928-100000@thelab.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 5 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Philip Warner wrote:
> >> At 21:59 5/11/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>>> Looks like a great kluge to me ;-)
> >>
> >> Hmph. I prefer to think of it as a 'user-defined optimizer hint'. ;-}
>
> > Except, if we are telling it to get rid of using the index, may as well
> > get rid of it altogether, as updates/inserts would be slowed down by
> > having to update that too ...
>
> Sure --- but do you have any other query types where the index *is*
> useful? If so, Philip's idea will let you suppress use of the index
> for just this one kind of query.

Actually, it looks like they got a bit smart, and they search for the URL
in the url table based on the CRC32 value instead of text ...

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 2000-11-06 03:34:49 Re: How to get around LIKE inefficiencies?
Previous Message Ron Chmara 2000-11-06 03:19:21 Re: How to get around LIKE inefficiencies?