Re: Re: rfd: multi-key GiST index problems - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Oleg Bartunov
Subject Re: Re: rfd: multi-key GiST index problems
Date
Msg-id Pine.GSO.4.33.0105251235390.14271-100000@ra.sai.msu.su
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: rfd: multi-key GiST index problems  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

>
> indexRelation->rd_am->amsupport, cf. InitIndexStrategy.

Thanks Tom

>
> >    In third example with multi-key index we
> >    forced to use 'with (islossy)' for all index even if select will
> >    use index by first attribute (b gist_box_ops) which is a not right
> >    thing.
>
> islossy is a per-index attribute, not a per-column attribute.  I don't
> think it makes sense to define it any other way.  If any one of the
> columns is stored in a lossy fashion, then the index is lossy.

Not always. If we have multi-key index and only 2nd column requires lossy
why do we need to check lossiness if select only 1st column ?
It's not a high priority, but some optimization would be fine.


>
>             regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
>

    Regards,
        Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: "Alexander Zagrebin"
Date:
Subject: RE: bug in plpgsql???
Next
From: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Date:
Subject: DATE_PART() BUG? We have an SQL statement that is giving wrong output.