Re: Planner not choosing GIN index
От | Corey Huinker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Planner not choosing GIN index |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CADkLM=d1qUY_MtvRgMW=nVy9iRGMZ24KHbcLxqSdfqdo6gY3HQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Planner not choosing GIN index (Flo Rance <trourance@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Planner not choosing GIN index
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 5:11 AM Flo Rance <trourance@gmail.com> wrote:
It is an expected behavior. You can see the list of array operators with which a GIN index can be used in the doc:And a very good and detailed explanation about any operator here:Regards,FloOn Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 2:44 AM Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com> wrote:A client had an issue with a where that had a where clause something like this:WHERE 123456 = ANY(integer_array_column)I was surprised that this didn't use the pre-existing GIN index on integer_array_column, whereas recoding asWHERE ARRAY[123456] <@ integer_array_columndid cause the GIN index to be used. Is this a known/expected behavior? If so, is there any logical reason why we couldn't have the planner pick up on that?
Thanks. I'll bring the question of why-cant-we over to the hackers list.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: