X-Original-To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADFBE4762EF
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon,  5 May 2003 09:31:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from wolff.to (wolff.to [66.93.249.74])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E917A474E42
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon,  5 May 2003 09:31:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 3038 invoked by uid 500); 5 May 2003 13:32:22 -0000
Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 08:32:22 -0500
From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah@trade-india.com>
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, Kyle <kyle@ccidomain.com>,
	Forum - PostGreSQL SQL <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Best way to delete time stamped data?
Message-ID: <20030505133222.GA2981@wolff.to>
Mail-Followup-To: Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah@trade-india.com>,
	josh@agliodbs.com, Kyle <kyle@ccidomain.com>,
	Forum - PostGreSQL SQL <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
References: <3EB2EBF0.8010003@ccidomain.com>
	<200305021619.41879.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200305051526.21885.mallah@trade-india.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200305051526.21885.mallah@trade-india.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-21.8 required=5.0
	tests=BAYES_10,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,USER_AGENT_MUTT
	autolearn=ham	version=2.50
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp)
X-Archive-Number: 200305/50
X-Sequence-Number: 13215

On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 15:26:21 +0530,
  Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah@trade-india.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> an index on age(date(trxdate)) would make it faster ?

That won't work because the value returned by age depends on the time
the transaction started. If you want the delete to be indexed you
need to write it out the longer way.