Re: Does anybody use ORDER BY x USING y?
| От | Hannu Krosing | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Does anybody use ORDER BY x USING y? | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1127123757.4849.9.camel@fuji.krosing.net обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: Does anybody use ORDER BY x USING y? (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>) | 
| Ответы | 
                	
            		Re: Does anybody use ORDER BY x USING y?
            		
            		 | 
		
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
On E, 2005-09-19 at 11:24 +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 11:13:05AM +0300, Hannu Krosing wrote: > > > (1) IS NULL is not an indexable operation, so no, not without > > > significant overhaul of the index AM API. > > > > But we do store NULLs in indexes, so why is it not indexable? > > > > This is either an interface bug (not making use of stored info) or > > storage bug (wasting space storing unneccessary info) > > Err, indexes used to not store NULLs to save space. However, it turns > out that SQL UNIQUE has something to say about NULLs in unique columns > so they had to be included. surely not UNIQUE hannu=# create table tabuniq(i int ); CREATE TABLE hannu=# create index tabuniq_ndx on tabuniq(i); CREATE INDEX hannu=# insert into tabuniq values(1); INSERT 20560497 1 hannu=# insert into tabuniq values(2); INSERT 20560498 1 hannu=# insert into tabuniq values(null); INSERT 20560499 1 hannu=# insert into tabuniq values(null); INSERT 20560500 1 maybe the problem is with PRIMARY KEY > However, the machinary to decide if an index is usable assumes that > usable operators have two arguments and IS NULL isn't really an > operator in the PostgreSQL sense and doesn't have two arguments either. > > *If* that can be fixed, then we can be more flexible. But if it were > easy it would have been done long ago... sure :) -- Hannu Krosing <hannu@skype.net>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: