Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Guillaume Smet
Subject Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd
Date
Msg-id 1d4e0c10702151632o3846869rddb0a9f83adfcadd@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd  ("Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On 2/15/07, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/15/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > I think that the
> > answer is probably "because the index is lossy for this operator,
> > so it has to be checked even if the bitmap didn't become lossy".
> > You'd have to check the GIST opclass definition to be sure.

FYI I've taken a look at PostGIS source code and the index is lossy
for the operator &&:
OPERATOR        3        &&    RECHECK,

(for every operator in the opclass to be exact)

--
Guillaume

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Guillaume Smet"
Date:
Subject: Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd
Next
From: "Krishna Kumar"
Date:
Subject: Re: Benchmarking PGSQL?