Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of jue jun 28 12:07:58 -0400 2012: > When this came up a couple weeks ago, the argument that was made for it > was that you could attach non-significant columns to an index that *is* > unique. That might or might not be a wide enough use-case to justify > adding such a horrid kludge.
The other question is whether such an index would prevent an update from being HOT when the non-indexed values are touched. That could be a significant difference. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
