Arnau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As you can see the time difference are very big
>Timestamp:318.328 ms
>int8 index: 120.804 ms
>double precision: 57.065 ms
As already suggested elsewhere, you probably weren't sufficiently
careful in taking your measurements.
A look at
On 5/22/07, Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:39:33PM +0200, Alexander Staubo wrote:
> PostgreSQL uses B-tree indexes for scalar values. For an expression
> such as "t between a and b", I believe it's going to match both sides
> of the table independently
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:39:33PM +0200, Alexander Staubo wrote:
> PostgreSQL uses B-tree indexes for scalar values. For an expression
> such as "t between a and b", I believe it's going to match both sides
> of the table independently (ie., t >= a and t <= b) and intersect
> these subsets. This i
On 5/22/07, Arnau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On older versions of PostgreSQL, at least in my experience, queries
on timestamps fields even having indexes where performing quite bad
mainly sequential scans where performed.
PostgreSQL uses B-tree indexes for scalar values. For an expression
su
Hi all,
I have some tables where all the queries that will be executed are
timestamps driven, so it'd be nice to have an index over those fields.
On older versions of PostgreSQL, at least in my experience, queries
on timestamps fields even having indexes where performing quite bad
mainly
