Ashutosh, * Ashutosh Bapat (ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com) wrote: > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Amos Bird <amosb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, the prefix is used to differentiate other \d commands, like > > this, > > > > amos=# \ditv > > List of relations > > Schema | Name | Type | Owner | Table > > --------+--------------------+--------------+-------+--------- > > public | i | table | amos | > > public | ii | index: gist | amos | i > > public | j | table | amos | > > public | jj | index: gin | amos | i > > public | jp | index: btree | amos | i > > public | js | index: brin | amos | i > > public | numbers | table | amos | > > public | numbers_mod2 | index: gin | amos | numbers > > public | numbers_mod2_btree | index: btree | amos | numbers > > public | ts | table | amos | > > (10 rows) > > The header for this table is "list of relations", so type gets > associated with relations indicated type of relation. btree: gin as a > type of relation doesn't sound really great.
The type is 'index', we're just adding a sub-type here to clarify the kind of index it is. > Instead we might want to > add another column "access method" and specify the access method used > for that relation. But then only indexes seem to have access methods > per pg_class.h. Right, I don't think having an extra column which is going to be NULL a large amount of the time is good. The approach taken by Amos seems like a good one to me, to have the type still be 'index' but with a sub-type indicating the access method. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
