On Oct 3, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>
>> But anyway, I still don’t understand why, if the function used to store the
>> value is immutable (as upper_inf() is), why Postgres doesn't do an index
>> scan. Is this something that could be improved in the planner?
>
> Yes. This is cle
David,
> But anyway, I still don’t understand why, if the function used to store the
> value is immutable (as upper_inf() is), why Postgres doesn't do an index
> scan. Is this something that could be improved in the planner?
Yes. This is clearly a TODO.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
On Oct 2, 2013, at 5:07 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > Hrm. I get a seq scan for that query:
> >
> > create index on try(upper_inf(irange));
> > explain select * from try where upper_inf(irange);
> > QUERY PLAN
> > ---
On Tuesday, October 1, 2013, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2013, at 3:56 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>
>> I don't think it has anything to do with the conditional index -- it's
>> the functional based. For some reason postgres always wants to post
>> filter (note the filter step below):
>>
>
On Oct 1, 2013, at 3:56 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I don't think it has anything to do with the conditional index -- it's
> the functional based. For some reason postgres always wants to post
> filter (note the filter step below):
>
> postgres=# create index on try(upper_inf(irange));
> CREATE
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:35 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> Hackers,
>
> I was trying to figure out why a query was not doing an index-only scan on a
> partial index, when Josh Berkus pointed to this issue, reported by Merlin
> Moncure:
>
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHyXU0x1OGao48
Hackers,
I was trying to figure out why a query was not doing an index-only scan on a
partial index, when Josh Berkus pointed to this issue, reported by Merlin
Moncure:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHyXU0x1OGao48WajAfUsbXqkUDLf=_6ho6hlmb8dsfkwda...@mail.gmail.com
In short, the plan
