Re: Question about explain of index scan
| От | Alvaro Herrera |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Question about explain of index scan |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20050902153810.GF18258@surnet.cl обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Question about explain of index scan (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Question about explain of index scan
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:03:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > > I wonder why we don't support more operators on Xid, so these things are > > avoided? Right now we only have =, AFAIR. > > I once started to make a btree opclass for XID, and stopped when it > occurred to me that XID comparison doesn't obey the transitive law. > btree won't like that... Not having it does affect the planner somehow, right? Maybe we could have the opclass but somehow dictate that making indexes with it is verboten. -- Alvaro Herrera -- Valdivia, Chile Architect, www.EnterpriseDB.com "Right now the sectors on the hard disk run clockwise, but I heard a rumor that you can squeeze 0.2% more throughput by running them counterclockwise. It's worth the effort. Recommended." (Gerry Pourwelle)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: