Re: [GENERAL] Seq scan of table? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Seq scan of table?
Date
Msg-id 1062786017.447.1.camel@tokyo
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] Seq scan of table?  (Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Seq scan of table?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 06:07, Richard Huxton wrote:
> PG's parser will assume an explicit number is an int4 - if you need an int8
> etc you'll need to cast it, yes.

Or enclose the integer literal in single quotes.

> You should find plenty of discussion of why in the archives, but the short
> reason is that PG's type structure is quite flexible which means it can't
> afford to make too many assumptions.

Well, it's definitely a bug in PG, it's "quite flexible" type structure
notwithstanding.

-Neil



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Seq scan of table?
Next
From: "Relaxin"
Date:
Subject: Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS