rawi writes:
> And querying: FTS with prefix matching:
> SELECT count(a)
> FROM t1
> WHERE a_tsvector @@ to_tsquery('aaa:* & b:* & c:* & d:*')
> (RESULT: count: 619)
> Total query runtime: 21266 ms.
FWIW, I get fairly decent performance for cases like this in HEAD
(at least with a GIN index; GI
Hi
I tested the following:
CREATE TABLE t1
(
id serial NOT NULL,
a character varying(125),
a_tsvector tsvector,
CONSTRAINT t1_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id)
);
INSERT INTO t1 (a, a_tsvector)
VALUES ('o,p,f,j,z,j',
to_tsvector('o,p,f,j,z,j');
CREAT
"W.Alphonse HAROUNY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Question:
> --
> I have an SQL request similar to:
>
> SELECT . FROM TBL1, TBL2 WHERE
> AND
> TBL1.CATEGORY & TBL2.CATEGORY <> 0 //-- where & is the AND bitwise
> operator
>
> Qst:
> 1/ IS the above SQL request will use the IND
Hello,
My question is about index usage when bitwise operations are invoked.
Situation Context:
--
Lets suppose we have 2 tables TBL1 and TBL2 as the following:
TBL1 {
. ;
integer categoryGroup; // categoryGroup is declared as an index on TABL1
. ;
}
On Saturday 11 August 2007 21:55:49 Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Joseph Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Friday 10 August 2007 23:30:14 Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Reverse-sorted index columns are possible but not well supported in
> >> existing PG releases (you need a custom operator class, and the
Andreas Joseph Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 10 August 2007 23:30:14 Tom Lane wrote:
>> Reverse-sorted index columns are possible but not well supported in
>> existing PG releases (you need a custom operator class, and the planner
>> is not all that bright about using them). 8.3 wi
On Saturday 11 August 2007 21:05:22 hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 04:53:12PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
> > I have the following test-case:
> >
> > CREATE TABLE test(
> > name varchar PRIMARY KEY,
> > value varchar NOT NULL,
> > created timestamp not null
> > );
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 04:53:12PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
> I have the following test-case:
>
> CREATE TABLE test(
> name varchar PRIMARY KEY,
> value varchar NOT NULL,
> created timestamp not null
> );
>
> create index test_lowernamevalue_idx ON test ((lower(name) || lower(value)));
On Friday 10 August 2007 23:30:14 Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Joseph Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is there a way I can have multiple columns in the ORDER BY clause, each
> > with different ASC/DESC-order and still use an index to speed up sorting?
>
> A btree index isn't magic, it's just an
Andreas Joseph Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a way I can have multiple columns in the ORDER BY clause, each with
> different ASC/DESC-order and still use an index to speed up sorting?
A btree index isn't magic, it's just an ordered list of entries. So you
can't just randomly flip t
I have the following test-case:
CREATE TABLE test(
name varchar PRIMARY KEY,
value varchar NOT NULL,
created timestamp not null
);
create index test_lowernamevalue_idx ON test ((lower(name) || lower(value)));
create index test_lowernamevaluecreated_idx ON test ((lower(name) ||
lower(value)), cre
On Tuesday 19 Nov 2002 9:10 am, Tomas Berndtsson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a question about index usage in PostgreSQL 7.2.1 on Solaris.
>
> At first, I did the query like this:
>
> SELECT po.portno,po.element,s.sname,pri,p.pname,value
> FROM port po, port_s s LEFT OUTER JOIN port_s_p p
> USING (elem
Hi,
I have a question about index usage in PostgreSQL 7.2.1 on Solaris.
I have three tables like this:
port: element text
portnoint
primary key: element, portno
index: element
port_s: element text
portnoint
sname text
pri int
primary key: elem
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Rajesh Kumar Mallah. wrote:
> Thanks very much for the response.
> set enable_seqscan=off; Definitely helps.
> and for wide date ranges it usees indexes.
>
>
> But with default value of enable_sequence changing date range seems to have effect.
> can you explain me a bit mor
Thanks very much for the response.
set enable_seqscan=off; Definitely helps.
and for wide date ranges it usees indexes.
But with default value of enable_sequence changing date range seems to have effect.
can you explain me a bit more or point me to right documents for understanding
the lan
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Rajesh Kumar Mallah. wrote:
> I am trying to improve a query to use existing indexes but facing diffculty.
>
>
> Looks like 'between' amd '>=' are not using indexes althoug > and < does.
> all my application code uses between and i am sure it use to work fine
> at one point
Hi ,
I am trying to improve a query to use existing indexes but facing diffculty.
Looks like 'between' amd '>=' are not using indexes althoug > and < does.
all my application code uses between and i am sure it use to work fine
at one point of time.
regds
mallah.
SQL TRANSCRIPT:
==
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Subra Radhakrishnan wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The index created by me is not being used while doing
> select. I found that out by using the EXPLAIN. For
> example:
>
> Table department has
>
> dept_num
> dept_desc
>
>
> Table 'employee' looks like this:
>
Hi All,
The index created by me is not being used while doing
select. I found that out by using the EXPLAIN. For
example:
Table department has
dept_num
dept_desc
Table 'employee' looks like this:
emp_num primary key,
emp_name,
dept_num (this i
19 matches
Mail list logo
