Gavin Sherry wrote:
Hi all,

I've updated the bitmap index patch. It can be found here:

This fixes some bugs introduced in the last patch, catches up to HEAD and
tidies up the executor code. I want to do a little more tidying, such as
reverting the name changes we made. multiscan still sounds alright.

Thanks, I'll take a look at it.

I just posted a patch to change the getmulti API. Please have a look at that and say what you think. I don't want to deliberately bitrot your patch, but on the other hand I do want to get the candidate matches support in before the bitmap index am, because reviewing and committing that can take a long time.

I've been thinking about vacuum as well. Something along the lines of what
Heikki mentioned earlier -- namely, the ability to iterate the bitmap
setbit by setbit is in order. What I have in mind, though, is that when we
find a reaped setbit, we mark the position and continue to iterate until
we find a non reaped setbit. When, we update the underlying bitmap vector
to reflect the non-set bits.

Ok. It's going to be opaque to the caller of the iterate-function anyway, right?

  Heikki Linnakangas

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to