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 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint, but on greater/lower? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bool btree_gin index not chosen on equality contraint, but on greater/lower?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Tom, Tom Lane schrieb am 14.02.2016 um 17:51: > Patric Bechtel <patric.bechtel@gmail.com> 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: