Re: Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint, but on greater/lower?
От
Patric Bechtel
Тема
Re: Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint,
but on greater/lower?
Дата
Msg-id
56C0FBAE.9010606@gmail.com
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint, but on
greater/lower? Patric Bechtel <patric.bechtel@gmail.com>
Re: Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint, but on greater/lower? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint,
but on greater/lower? Patric Bechtel <patric.bechtel@gmail.com>
Re: Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint, but on greater/lower? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Tom, Tom Lane schrieb am 14.02.2016 um 17:51: > Patric Bechtel writes: >> I tried to add bool support to the btree_gin contrib module, and as far as I can tell, it >> seems to work (wasn't that complicated, actually). But now I'm stuck, as PostgreSQL doesn't >> seem to like to use my new index, if I use equality or unequality, just with greater and >> lower than. > > I think your problem is that the planner won't apply match_boolean_index_clause() or > expand_boolean_index_clause(), because it has a hard-wired idea of which index opclasses could > possibly benefit from that, cf IsBooleanOpfamily(). oh, sh*t... My motivation was the size of the bool indexes; they are tiny and really fast. It feels almost like bitmap indexes. I hope that's not too far over my head already... but I'll take a look. If someone might give me a hint where to look, I'd be grateful. Thanks a lot for the hint, Patric -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GnuPT 2.5.2 iEYEARECAAYFAlbA+64ACgkQfGgGu8y7ypCfVwCg81dCY9Mv70+2dk8e3+5xChyO C7cAn1fRV3NAosi0W3IisKNEmS9K9hZE =Xd+r -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
От: Tom Lane
Дата: