On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:01 PM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote:

> On 2/15/16 10:29 AM, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> It's very pity but author is not able to continue work on this patch,
>> and I would like to raise this flag.
>> I'd like to add some comments about patches:
>> traversalValue patch adds arbitrary value assoсiated with branch in
>> SP-GiST tree walk. Unlike to recostructedValue it could be just pointer,
>> it havn't to be a regular pgsql type. Also, it could be used independly
>> from reconstructedValue. This patch is used both following attached
>> patches.
>> range patch just switchs using reconstructedValue to traversalValue in
>> range opclasses. reconstructedValue was used just because it was an
>> acceptable workaround in case of range type. Range opclase stores a full
>> value in leafs and doesn't need to use reconstructedValue to return
>> tuple in index only scan.
>> See http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5399.1343512...@sss.pgh.pa.us
>> q4d patch implements index over boxes using SP-GiST. Basic idea was an
>> observation, range opclass thinks about one-dimensional ranges as 2D
>> points.
>> Following this idea, we can think that 2D box (what is 2 points or 4
>> numbers) could represent a 4D point. We hoped that this approach will be
>> much more effective than traditional R-Tree in case of many overlaps in
>> box's collection.
>> Performance results are coming shortly.
> It appears that the issues raised in this thread have been addressed but
> the patch still has not gone though a real review.
> Anybody out there willing to take a crack at a review?  All three patches
> apply (with whitespace issues).

Emre Hasegeli will review the patch.

> Thanks,
> --
> -David
> da...@pgmasters.net

Reply via email to