Hello Haribabu, Thank you for the performance test. But please not that the patch is 'thrown away', and will be totally rewritten. I have no idea of the status of the second / third attempt however. However, what is interesting is that for some queries this patch is already on par with VCI. Which db is that exactly?
Alvaro, You wrote that a wiki page would be opened regarding this. But I still cannot find such a page (expect for an old page which hasn't changed in the last year). Is there already something we can look at? Bert On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.harib...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > So we discussed some of this stuff during the developer meeting in > > Brussels and the main conclusion is that we're going to split this up in > > multiple independently useful pieces, and write up the general roadmap > > in the wiki so that we can discuss in detail on-list. > > > > I'm marking this as Returned with Feedback now. > > > > Thanks everybody, > > Here I attached the DBT-3 performance report that is measured on the > prototype patch > that is written for columnar storage as I mentioned in my earlier mail > with WOS and ROS > design. > > Currently to measure the benefits of this design, we did the following > changes, > 1. Created the columnar storage index similar like other index methods > 2. Used custom plan to generate the plan that can use the columnar storage > 3. Optimized parallelism to use the columnar storage > > The code is not fully ready yet, I posted the performance results to > get a view from > community, whether this approach is really beneficial? > > I will provide the full details of the design and WIP patches later. > > Regards, > Hari Babu > Fujitsu Australia > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > > -- Bert Desmet 0477/305361