Em 05/12/2012 09:59, ERR ORR escreveu:
Hi Edson,
since you are using 'like' in your select, you may want to try the
following (example):
CREATE INDEX "MY_LONG_INDEX_NAME_IDX"
ON "MY_TABLE_NAME"
USING btree
("MY_VARCHAR_FIELD_NAME" COLLATE pg_catalog."default"
*varchar_pattern_ops*);
(fo
Hi Edson,
since you are using 'like' in your select, you may want to try the
following (example):
CREATE INDEX "MY_LONG_INDEX_NAME_IDX"
ON "MY_TABLE_NAME"
USING btree
("MY_VARCHAR_FIELD_NAME" COLLATE pg_catalog."default" *varchar_pattern_ops
*);
(for TEXT fields, use *text_pattern_ops* in t
On Wednesday, December 05, 2012 02:44:39 AM Edson Richter wrote:
> Sort (cost=11938.72..11938.74 rows=91 width=93)
>Sort Key: t0.nome
>-> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..11938.42 rows=91 width=93)
> -> Nested Loop (cost=0.00..11935.19 rows=91 width=85)
>-> Seq Scan on
I'm no expert on this, but it will likely be more helpful to others if
you include the table description with all the indices.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Edson Richter wrote:
> I've a table with >110 rows, with streets.
> I'm making a partial search using zip code, and PostgreSQL is igno
I've a table with >110 rows, with streets.
I'm making a partial search using zip code, and PostgreSQL is ignoring
my ZIP index.
I'm sure I'm making some mistake, but I can't see where.
The query is:
SELECT t2.ID, t2.CEP, t2.COMPLEMENTO, t2.NOME, t2.NOMESEMACENTOS,
t2.TIPO, t2.BAIRRO_ID
