At 12:39 PM 5/19/00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>
> > We have indexes on all system tables that need it.
>
> There isn't any fundamental reason why the planner can't be using an
> index to scan pg_index; we just need to code it that way. Right now
> it's coded as a sequential scan.
Eliminating the hard-coded seqscans of catalogs in the bowels of the
system was the hardest part of the project. As I said, it was good
to do. It made parsing and planning queries much, much faster.
mike
