I've brought the GIT patch up-to-date with CVS head. The latest version can be found at http://community.enterprisedb.com/git/

I also reran the CPU bound test cases with the latest patch.

I want this in 8.3 in some form, and I have the time to do any required changes. If someone wants to see more tests, I can arrange that as well.

The patch is pretty big at the moment. I think the best way to proceed with this is to extract some smaller, incremental patches from it that just refactor the current b-tree code. After that, the final patch that implements GIT should be much smaller and more readable. And there's still a bunch of todo items there as well...

But before I start doing that, I need some review and general agreement on the design. What I don't want to happen is that three days after the feature freeze, someone finally looks at it and finds a major issue or just thinks it's an unreadable mess, and we no longer have the time to fix it.

One question that I'm sure someone will ask is do we need this if we have bitmap indexes? Both aim at having a smaller index, after all. The use cases are quite different; GIT is effective whenever you have a table that's reasonably well-clustered. Unlike the bitmap indexam, GIT's effectiveness doesn't depend on the number of distinct values, in particular it works well with unique indexes. GIT is comparable to clustered indexes in other DBMSs (in fact we might want to call GIT that in the end).

  Heikki Linnakangas
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to