e [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 9:07 AM
> > To: Jan Wieck
> > Cc: Oleg Bartunov; Teodor Sigaev; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Null values in indexes
> >
> >
> > Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > &
Oleg Bartunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do we need to fix GiST code for 7.3 ?
No, I think it's fine. I had forgotten that old discussion ...
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extens
Glad to hear GiST in 7.2 isn't broken :-)
We miss the topic, what was the problem ?
Do we need to fix GiST code for 7.3 ?
proposal for null-safe GiST interface is available
http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1028327
and discussion
http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=1025848
>> Urgh ... that means GiST indexing is actually broken, because GiST
>> currently handles multicolumns but not nulls.
Actually, it appears that 7.2 GiST does handle NULLs in columns after
the first one, which I think is enough to avoid the problem Jan
mentioned. The boolean column pg_am.amindex
ay, May 29, 2002 9:07 AM
> > To: Jan Wieck
> > Cc: Oleg Bartunov; Teodor Sigaev; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Null values in indexes
> >
> >
> > Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Hannu Kros
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 9:07 AM
> To: Jan Wieck
> Cc: Oleg Bartunov; Teodor Sigaev; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Null values in indexes
>
>
> Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTE
Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How hard would it be to _not_ include nulls in indexes
> as they are not used anyway.
>>
>> Seems to me that would be a step backwards.
> It would cause multi-key indexes beeing unusable f
Tom Lane wrote:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > How hard would it be to _not_ include nulls in indexes
> > as they are not used anyway.
>
> Seems to me that would be a step backwards.
It would cause multi-key indexes beeing unusable for partial
key lookup. Imagine you hav
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How hard would it be to _not_ include nulls in indexes
> as they are not used anyway.
Seems to me that would be a step backwards.
What should someday happen is to make IS NULL an indexable operator.
The fact that we haven't got around to doing so is
"Dann Corbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> With 7.1.3, large indexes with null values allowed in one or more of the
> columns would cause crashes. (I have definitely seen this happen).
> Have repairs been effected in 7.2?
Submit a test case and we'll tell you ...
regard
With 7.1.3, large indexes with null values allowed in one or more of the
columns would cause crashes. (I have definitely seen this happen).
Here is a project that mentions repairs:
http://postgis.refractions.net/news/index.php?file=20020425.data
Have repairs been effected in 7.2? Are they dela
11 matches
Mail list logo