Re: BUG #14032: trigram index is not used for '=' operator
От | Artur Zakirov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #14032: trigram index is not used for '=' operator |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 56EFB0C4.2000308@postgrespro.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #14032: trigram index is not used for '=' operator (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 20.03.2016 04:06, Jeff Janes wrote: > > I think it is actually quite trivial to support '='. In fact I think > that all you have to do is tap into the same code that LIKE already > uses, and let the recheck remove things which match on the LIKE > interpretation of the query string but not the equality > interpretation. > > Attached is a crude patch I put together which seems to do the job, > but I haven't thoroughly tested it. > > The main problem is likely to be that there is already a really good > index type for speeding up equality queries (btree), and adding > another (generally much worse) alternative is likely to confuse the > planner more than anything. Is it really worth taking the performance > hit on executing the equality query in order to avoid just keeping a > second btree index? Maybe not :) > > If I could somehow turn this into an extension module that installed > with pg_trgm as a dependency, rather than reaching into pg_trgm's > internals, then it might be worthwhile putting something like this on > PGXN. But I don't know how to do that. And it doesn't seem > worthwhile to change pg_trgm itself in this way. > > But in any case, it isn't a bug that pg_trgm doesn't do everything it > theoretically could do. Yes. And so this changes can be applied only for PostgreSQL 9.7. > > Cheers, > > Jeff > -- Artur Zakirov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: