From: | "Thomas F(dot) O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PgSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Index Administration: pg_index vs. pg_get_indexdef() |
Date: | 2005-11-23 06:18:03 |
Message-ID: | 545521C7-C1E0-4565-A077-E8BC1E3C6FB9@sitening.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Thomas F. O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com> writes:
>> In an old thread <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2004-01/
>> msg00271.php>, Tom Lane suggested that it would be "unreasonable" to
>> use pg_index to reconstruct (expressional) indexes (in 7.4). The
>> suggested alternative was to use pg_get_indexdef().
>
> IIRC, the point I was trying to make was that making client code
> try to
> interpret the contents of pg_index.indexprs or pg_index.indpred is a
> losing proposition. If you feel that you'd rather read the other
> fields
> of pg_index for yourself, I won't argue with you.
Yeah, I took a look at pg_index.indexprs and have already Perled up a
parser for the pg_get_indexdef() output... :)
Out of curiosity (without much knowledge of how pg_get_indexdef()
generates its output), would it be difficult to allow the view to
have a more useful format? What is the intention of providing an
expression tree? How could that be used?
--
Thomas F. O'Connell
Database Architecture and Programming
Co-Founder
Sitening, LLC
http://www.sitening.com/
110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6
Nashville, TN 37203-6320
615-469-5150
615-469-5151 (fax)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bjørn T Johansen | 2005-11-23 06:32:37 | Logging prepared statements in 8.1? |
Previous Message | asfar khan | 2005-11-23 06:13:52 | How to commuciate between two server in postgress |