From: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Cc: marc@fallon.classyad.com
Cc: pgsql-sql@hub.org
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Functional Indexes
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 22:48:31 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <199902080348.WAA04656@candle.pha.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13890.918443915@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>
> Note to hackers: is there a good reason why indexes are more
> restrictive? Offhand it seems like the same physical-equivalence
> trick could be applied.
What do you mean by restrictive. If you mean:
* allow creation of functional indexes to use default types
It is on the TODO list, and has been for a while.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: maillist@candle.pha.pa.us, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, marc@fallon.classyad.com, pgsql-sql@hub.org, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] Functional Indexes
In-Reply-To: <199902080348.WAA04656@candle.pha.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