Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-12-03 Thread MARK CALLAGHAN
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 3:53 AM, Kristian Nielsen wrote: > Greg Stark writes: > >> Just so everyone is on the same page Even once we have index-only >> scans they won't be anywhere near as useful with Postgres as they are >> with Oracle and other databases. At least not unless we find a >> sol

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-12-01 Thread Kristian Nielsen
Greg Stark writes: > Just so everyone is on the same page Even once we have index-only > scans they won't be anywhere near as useful with Postgres as they are > with Oracle and other databases. At least not unless we find a > solution for a different problem -- our inability to scan btree > i

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-12 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Greg Stark wrote: > On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> We last researched index-only scans, also called covering indexes, in >> September of 2008, but have made little progress on it since.  Many have >> been waiting for Heikki to implement t

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-12 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of vie nov 12 11:01:39 -0300 2010: > It took me a while to understand what Greg meant as well. You can't scan > a B-tree index in *physical order*, You have to first descend to the > leftmost leaf, and follow the right pointers from there until you reac

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-12 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 11/12/2010 09:17 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: Greg Stark wrote: On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: We last researched index-only scans, also called covering indexes, in September of 2008, but have made little progress on it since. ?Many have been waiting for Heikki to imple

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Greg Stark wrote: > On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > We last researched index-only scans, also called covering indexes, in > > September of 2008, but have made little progress on it since. ?Many have > > been waiting for Heikki to implement this but I talked to him and he

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-12 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 12.11.2010 15:51, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Excerpts from Greg Stark's message of vie nov 12 10:33:28 -0300 2010: In Postgres, aside from the visibility issues we have a separate problem. In order to achieve high concurrency we allow splits to occur without locking the index. And the new pages c

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-12 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Greg Stark's message of vie nov 12 10:33:28 -0300 2010: > In Postgres, aside from the visibility issues we have a separate > problem. In order to achieve high concurrency we allow splits to occur > without locking the index. And the new pages can be found anywhere in > the index, eve

Re: [HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-12 Thread Greg Stark
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > We last researched index-only scans, also called covering indexes, in > September of 2008, but have made little progress on it since.  Many have > been waiting for Heikki to implement this but I talked to him and he > doesn't have time. > > I

[HACKERS] We need index-only scans

2010-11-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
We last researched index-only scans, also called covering indexes, in September of 2008, but have made little progress on it since. Many have been waiting for Heikki to implement this but I talked to him and he doesn't have time. I believe it is time for the community to move forward and I woul