From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
Cc: Tobias Brox <tobias@nordicbet.com>
Cc: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Index on a NULL-value
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 01:12:46 -0400
Message-ID: <8324.1117516366@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87mzqcvxdm.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
References: <20050531030207.GD26100@tobias.exoweb.net>
<20050531032119.GH26100@tobias.exoweb.net>
<20050531033633.GA20015@wolff.to>
<20050531034529.GJ26100@tobias.exoweb.net>
<87mzqcvxdm.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> then it would be a candidate because the ORDER BY or the other > 0 make the
> index look relevant. But I don't think (again I'm not 100% sure) that the
> partial index WHERE clause is considered in picking which indexes to consider.
Nope, the partial index will be considered simply on the strength of its
predicate matching the WHERE clause.
Of course, if you can get some additional mileage by having the index
contents be useful, that's great --- but it's not necessary.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, gsstark@mit.edu, tobias@nordicbet.com, bruno@wolff.to
Subject: Re: Index on a NULL-value
In-Reply-To: <8324.1117516366@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox