Re: order by, for custom types
От | Grzegorz Jaskiewicz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: order by, for custom types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9A435649-40A3-494A-A1B0-C2A3D6B0FB76@pointblue.com.pl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: order by, for custom types (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: order by, for custom types
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2005-11-18, at 22:53, Tom Lane wrote: > Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj@pointblue.com.pl> writes: >> I have all operators required for b-tree, gist up here, and gist >> index defined. But still "order by custom_type" won't work. > > Define "won't work" ... what happens? > Wildcards cause things not to work as they should consider everything in [] brackets to be a possible choice and those three: a = 1.2.3.4 b = 1.[2,3].3.4 c = 1.3.3.4 a = b, b = c, but a <> c, I was told that because of that btree won't work on my type. (on irc, that was AndrewSN as I recall). > You don't need an index, but a b-tree operator class is a good idea. > Still, it should be possible to sort with only a "<" operator --- at > the moment anyway. (I've been thinking about some ideas that would > effectively require a b-tree opclass to do sorting, so this might not > still be true in 8.2 ...) I do have all operators required for btree, no operator class defined, every single operator. Btree requires some function apart from operators, this one is not defined, but I do have = operator as well. -- GJ "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called Research, would it?" - AE
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: