Re: Updated RUM-index and support for bigint as part of index - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Artur Zakirov
Subject Re: Updated RUM-index and support for bigint as part of index
Date
Msg-id CAKNkYnyMSe9x_ks763Knn3UYFvnw6TM=UKFrjYynx21C6N4k4Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Updated RUM-index and support for bigint as part of index  (Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas@visena.com>)
Responses Re: Updated RUM-index and support for bigint as part of index  (Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas@visena.com>)
List pgsql-general
Hello,

2016-08-02 21:08 GMT+03:00 Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas@visena.com>
The ORDER BY part seems strange; It seems one has to find a value "lower than any other value" to use as a kind of base, why is this necessary? It also seems that in order to be able to sort DESC one has to provide a timestamp value "higher than any other value", is this correct?
 
It would be great if the docs explained this.

We will write more detailed documentation for RUM.
 
 
I really miss the opportunity to include a BIGINT as part of the index, so that the WHERE-clause could be like this:
 
WHERE del.fts_all @@ to_tsquery('simple', 'andreas&kr') AND del.folder_id IN (1,2,3)
 
Having this would be perfect for my use-case searching in email in folders, sorted by received_date, and having it use ONE index.
 
Will this be supported?

We have a plan to use generic types to able to include bigint, timestamp and other types as part of index. But I cant tell date of it.

--
Artur Zakirov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: John R Pierce
Date:
Subject: Re: Build or Install pg_loader on Windows
Next
From: Philippe Girolami
Date:
Subject: Re: Should a DB vacuum use up a lot of space ?