Re: [RFC] Minmax indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Noah Misch
Subject Re: [RFC] Minmax indexes
Date
Msg-id 20130901182628.GA105468@tornado.leadboat.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [RFC] Minmax indexes  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 06:28:06PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Partial indexes are not supported; since an index is concerned with minimum and
> maximum values of the involved columns across all the pages in the table, it
> doesn't make sense to exclude values.

It can make sense if the predicate references a column other than the indexed
column(s).  Unlike a partial btree index, a partial minmax index would be no
smaller.  It could have narrower min-max spreads, reducing the recheck work
done by queries.

> Another way to see "partial" indexes
> here would be those that only considered some pages in the table instead of all
> of them; but this would be difficult to implement and manage and, most likely,
> pointless.

That's a distinct feature from the AM-independent partial index mechanism, in
any event.

> Expressional indexes can probably be supported in the future, but we disallow
> them initially for conceptual simplicity.

Whether an index column uses an expression is irrelevant to each existing core
AM.  How does minmax differ in this respect?

Thanks,
nm

-- 
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB                                 http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: [v9.4] row level security
Next
From: Kohei KaiGai
Date:
Subject: Re: [v9.4] row level security