Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-24 Thread Emre Hasegeli
> Aside from the disturbing frequency of 100-to-1 split ratios, it also > looks like the inclusion of the masklen bit is hardly pulling its weight, > though that might be a artifact of this data set. I was expecting this. Including masklen bit to decision was something we could easily do. It

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-24 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > I've pushed this patch with mostly (not entirely) cosmetic adjustments. > I still think it'd be worth looking into why the produced index is larger > than the GiST equivalent, and for that matter exactly why the GiST > equivalent is so much slower to search. I spent some time poking at

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-23 Thread Tom Lane
I've pushed this patch with mostly (not entirely) cosmetic adjustments. I still think it'd be worth looking into why the produced index is larger than the GiST equivalent, and for that matter exactly why the GiST equivalent is so much slower to search. regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-21 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Gierth writes: > "Tom" == Tom Lane writes: > Tom> I started to look at this patch. The reported speedup is pretty > Tom> nice, but ... > The builtin gist support for inet seems quite surprisingly slow; ip4r > beats it into the ground

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-21 Thread Andrew Gierth
> "Tom" == Tom Lane writes: > Emre Hasegeli writes: >> Attached patches add SP-GiST support to the inet datatypes. Tom> I started to look at this patch. The reported speedup is pretty Tom> nice, but ... The builtin gist support for inet seems

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-21 Thread Tom Lane
Emre Hasegeli writes: >> ... Several of the existing opclasses use fixed numbers of >> child nodes, so why does this need something they don't? > Currently, SP-GiST framework supports fixed number of child nodes, if > the index is growing by page splits, not by prefix splits.

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-21 Thread Emre Hasegeli
> ... this part of the patch breaks the existing API for SP-GiST opclasses. > That is a hard sell. It may only matter for one existing opclass in core, > but unless we have reason to think nobody is using any custom SP-GiST > opclasses, that is not a pleasant thing to do. How important is it

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-08-20 Thread Tom Lane
Emre Hasegeli writes: > Attached patches add SP-GiST support to the inet datatypes. I started to look at this patch. The reported speedup is pretty nice, but ... > The operator > class comes with a small change on the SP-GiST framework to allow fixed > number of child nodes.

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-03-09 Thread Emre Hasegeli
>> Spgist index tree is much better than gist - 12149 pages vs 1334760 ! I assume this is the reason why it is bigger. IP addresses are very well suited to SP-GiST. They naturally do not overlap. > I also noticed, that spgist is much faster than gist for other inet > operators. I'd like to

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-03-08 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: > >> > Emre, I checked original thread and didn't find sample data. Could you >> provide them for testing ? >> >> I found it on the Git

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-03-08 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: > > Emre, I checked original thread and didn't find sample data. Could you > provide them for testing ? > > I found it on the Git history: > > >

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-03-03 Thread Emre Hasegeli
> Emre, I checked original thread and didn't find sample data. Could you > provide them for testing ? I found it on the Git history: https://github.com/job/irrexplorer/blob/9e8b5330d7ef0022abbe1af18291257e044eb24b/data/irrexplorer_dump.sql.gz?raw=true -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-03-02 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: > >> Attached patches add SP-GiST support to the inet datatypes. The >> operator class comes with a small change on the SP-GiST framework to

Re: [HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-03-02 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: > Attached patches add SP-GiST support to the inet datatypes. The operator > class comes with a small change on the SP-GiST framework to allow fixed > number of child nodes. > > The index is like prefix tree except that it

[HACKERS] SP-GiST support for inet datatypes

2016-03-02 Thread Emre Hasegeli
Attached patches add SP-GiST support to the inet datatypes. The operator class comes with a small change on the SP-GiST framework to allow fixed number of child nodes. The index is like prefix tree except that it doesn't bother to split the addresses into parts as text is split. It also doesn't