Re: AW: pg_index.indislossy - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: AW: pg_index.indislossy
Date
Msg-id 200107091835.f69IZnx08978@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to AW: pg_index.indislossy  (Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>)
Responses Re: AW: pg_index.indislossy  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Added to pg_index.h file as a comment.

> 
> > > > Can someone tell me what we use indislossy for? 
> 
> Ok, so the interpretation of this field is:
>     A match in the index needs to be reevaluated in the heap tuple data,
>     since a match in the index does not necessarily mean, that the heap tuple
>     matches.
>     If the heap tuple data matches, the index must always match.
> 
> A very typical example for such an index is a hash index. This might explain the 
> fact, that the ODBC driver misinterpreted that field as meaning that the index is a hash.  
> The field has nothing to do with partial index.
> 
> Andreas
> 

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: Re: AW: New SQL Datatype RECURRINGCHAR
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: grant and SQL92