Re: Supporting = operator in gin/gist_trgm_ops
| От | Jeff Janes |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Supporting = operator in gin/gist_trgm_ops |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMkU=1zxfA8_MGBW6sJMj54p8nPoe4bMb5LoG-rMYZVPq4j08Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Supporting = operator in gin/gist_trgm_ops (Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Supporting = operator in gin/gist_trgm_ops
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 12:31 AM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
I went through and revised this patch. I made the documentation
statement less categorical. pg_trgm gist/gin indexes might have lower
performance of equality operator search than B-tree. So, we can't
claim the B-tree index is always not needed. Also, simple comparison
operators are <, <=, >, >=, and they are not supported.
Is "simple comparison" here a well-known term of art? If I read the doc as committed (which doesn't include the sentence above), and if I didn't already know what it was saying, I would be left wondering which comparisons those are. Could we just say "inequality operators"?
Cheers,
Jeff
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: