Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF2E9FB73A for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:09:28 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65367-04 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:09:16 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com [66.249.82.236]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 145589FB4E2 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:09:15 -0400 (AST) Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i28so767407wxd for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:09:15 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=cGJn2LXRD08VoQr00YPFh5I7gaVzukFC1yF7uCTIZmGXUwtJAYmkC/RaxDxAPhIVFuCm9Aj++dhwlc+HpnWEDTDtuNeFs9FqYxo1gJGOo7ZF45xL7SYBckDTy++4rDMwwB28wp2OHJFCWOVds6prtoOfQ48jK8b6M7SKK+LeoL0= Received: by 10.90.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr2851995agb.1171562955473; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:09:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.90.113.7 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:09:15 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1d4e0c10702151009n54772ac0rece99a7af35f3399@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:09:15 +0100 From: "Guillaume Smet" To: "Tom Lane" Subject: Re: Question about Bitmap Heap Scan/BitmapAnd Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <26633.1171557289@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1d4e0c10702130832i35484abfmb229f5d0b4d9223b@mail.gmail.com> <1285.1171385353@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1d4e0c10702130917x5b6ddaf7g540bfe1f7c93b728@mail.gmail.com> <1977.1171389065@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1d4e0c10702150805i73097134uf45ce1faa80e3763@mail.gmail.com> <20070215162733.GO4682@alvh.no-ip.org> <26633.1171557289@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200702/177 X-Sequence-Number: 23231 On 2/15/07, Tom Lane wrote: > I think that the > answer is probably "because the index is lossy for this operator, > so it has to be checked even if the bitmap didn't become lossy". > You'd have to check the GIST opclass definition to be sure. Any idea on what I have to look for (if it's of any interest for anyone, otherwise, I can live with your answer)? Thanks. -- Guillaume