"Qingqing Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Robert Edmonds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote >> Instead of specifying explicit address ranges in the query, I'd like >> to store the ranges in a table:
> Good illustration. I guess we have a problem of the historgram statistical > information. No, that's completely irrelevant to his problem. The reason we can't do this is that the transformation from "x << const" to a range check on x is a plan-time transformation; there's no mechanism in place to do it at runtime. This is not easy to fix, because the mechanism that's doing it is primarily intended for LIKE/regex index optimization, and in that case a runtime pattern might well not be optimizable at all. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly