> I have a short description bellow from Dev team regarding the behaviour of
> gist index on the polygon column, looking to get some feedback from you:
> ".... I was expecting the <@(point,polygon) and @>(polygon,point) to be
> indexable but they are not. see bellow query output ,
> the column is a polygon and the index is a gist index on the polygon column;
> my understanding of the above query is that it says which operators would
> cause that index to be used
> This SQL shows which operators are indexable:SELECT
> pg_get_indexdef(ss.indexrelid, (ss.iopc).n, TRUE) AS index_col,
> amop.amopopr::regoperator AS indexable_operator
> FROM pg_opclass opc, pg_amop amop,
> (SELECT indexrelid, information_schema._pg_expandarray(indclass) AS iopc
> FROM pg_index
> WHERE indexrelid = 'caom2.Plane_energy_ib'::regclass) ss
> WHERE amop.amopfamily = opc.opcfamily AND opc.oid = (ss.iopc).x
> ORDER BY (ss.iopc).n, indexable_operator;
> We run the SQL in PG 9.5.3 and PG 10.2 we the same result: only polygon vs
> polygon is indexable (except the last entry which is distance operator).
> The work around for us was to change interval-contains-value from
> polygon-contains-point (@> or <@ operator) to
> polygn-intersects-really-small-polygon (&&) in order to use the index, but I
> was quite surprised that contains operators are not indexable!
> Note that this is using the built in polygon and not pgsphere (spoly)"
That sounds about right.
You could use a single-point polygon like '((1,1))'::polygon
and the <@ or && operator.
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com