On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 06:03:12PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There's one nontrivial decision still to make about how to implement
proper per-spec row-comparison operations, namely: how a row
comparison ought to be represented in the index access method API.
The current representation of index
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 18:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
There's one nontrivial decision still to make about how to implement
proper per-spec row-comparison operations, namely: how a row
comparison ought to be represented in the index access method API.
I'm
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
ISTM that row-wise comparisons, as far as indexes are concerned are
actually simpler than normal scan-keys. For example, if you have the
condition (a,b) = (5,1) then once the index has found that point,
every subsequent entry in the index
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 12:07:44PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Since you didn't understand what I was saying, I suspect that plan A is
too confusing ...
Umm, yeah. Now you've explained it I think it should be excluded on the
basis that it'll be a source of bugs. For all the places that matter a
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 12:07:44PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Since you didn't understand what I was saying, I suspect that plan A is
too confusing ...
Umm, yeah. Now you've explained it I think it should be excluded on the
basis that it'll be a
