Re: contrib/intarray (was Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: contrib/intarray (was Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases)
Date
Msg-id 18540.1294526983@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: contrib/intarray (was Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases)  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes:
> On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There seem to be three ways
>> in which intarray is simpler/faster than the generic operators:
>> 
>> * restricted to integer arrays
>> * restricted to 1-D arrays
>> * doesn't allow nulls in the arrays

> My understanding is that they also perform much better if the values in an integer array are ordered. Does that
matter?

Some of the operations sort the array contents as an initial step.  I'm
not sure how much faster they'll be if the array is already ordered,
but in any case they don't *require* presorted input.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: Wildcard search support for pg_trgm
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Range Types