Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

> 22 окт. 2017 г., в 21:21, Tom Lane написал(а): > > Andrey Borodin writes: >> I was looking for a way to correctly drop compress\decompress functions from >> opclasses. > > Making a new opclass seems like a pretty grotty answer; it won't > help

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Andrey Borodin writes: > I was looking for a way to correctly drop compress\decompress functions from > opclasses. Making a new opclass seems like a pretty grotty answer; it won't help existing installations. I think what you need is to undo opclasscmds.c's decision that

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Hi, Tom! > 20 сент. 2017 г., в 8:38, Tom Lane написал(а): > > Andrey Borodin writes: >> [ 0001-Allow-uncompressed-GiST-4.patch ] > > Pushed, with a bit more work on the documentation and some minor > cosmetic changes. > > I did not like the fact that

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Alexander Korotkov writes: > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Yes. We don't allow out-of-line values, but we do allow compressed and > >> short-header

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Alexander Korotkov writes: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yes. We don't allow out-of-line values, but we do allow compressed and >> short-header values. > BTW, this comment looks still invalid for me... >> #define SIGLENINT

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrey Borodin writes: > > You mentioned that probably there cannot be TOASTed values in the index. > > I need to settle this question in more deterministic way. > > Can you point where to look at the

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Andrey Borodin writes: > You mentioned that probably there cannot be TOASTed values in the index. > I need to settle this question in more deterministic way. > Can you point where to look at the code or who to ask: > Can there be TOASTed values in index tuples? Yes. We

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote: > Hello Tom! Thanks for committing the patch! > > > 20 сент. 2017 г., в 8:38, Tom Lane написал(а): > > > > Andrey Borodin writes: > >> [ 0001-Allow-uncompressed-GiST-4.patch

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Hello Tom! Thanks for committing the patch! > 20 сент. 2017 г., в 8:38, Tom Lane написал(а): > > Andrey Borodin writes: >> [ 0001-Allow-uncompressed-GiST-4.patch ] > > ... There's still room > to improve the contrib opclasses I have one important

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Andrey Borodin writes: > [ 0001-Allow-uncompressed-GiST-4.patch ] Pushed, with a bit more work on the documentation and some minor cosmetic changes. I did not like the fact that the new code paths added by the patch were untested, so I went ahead and removed the

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote: > > 14 сент. 2017 г., в 18:42, Alexander Korotkov > написал(а): > > It would be good if someone would write patch for removing useless > compress/decompress methods from builtin and contrib

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Dmitry and Alexander, thank you for looking into the patch! > 14 сент. 2017 г., в 18:42, Alexander Korotkov > написал(а): > It would be good if someone would write patch for removing useless > compress/decompress methods from builtin and contrib GiST opclasses. >

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Dmitriy Sarafannikov < dsarafanni...@yandex.ru> wrote: > The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: > make installcheck-world: tested, passed > Implements feature: tested, passed > Spec compliant: tested, passed >

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, passed Spec compliant: tested, passed Documentation:tested, passed This is simple and intuitive patch. Code looks pretty clear

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

> 11 сент. 2017 г., в 12:57, Dmitriy Sarafannikov > написал(а): > Hi Andrew! Thanks for the patch, but patch > 0001-allow-uncompressed-Gist-2.patch no longer applies on current master > branch. > Please could you rebase it? Sure, see attachment. Thanks for looking

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: not tested Implements feature: not tested Spec compliant: not tested Documentation:not tested Hi Andrew! Thanks for the patch, but patch

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

2017-05-29 0:00 GMT+05:00 Tom Lane : > But the opclass's consistent function might expect to be always given an > untoasted input, in which case you'd need the decompress function to fix > that up. In cube data is detoasted at least 4 times before going to

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Andrew Borodin writes: > I'm not expert in toasting, cube's compress does nothing while cube > decomress does detoasting. Is this for reason? The original input datum could be toasted --- at least to the extent of being compressed in-line or having short header; I do not

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

28 мая 2017 г. 11:15 PM пользователь "Tom Lane" написал: Andrew Borodin writes: > 2017-05-28 22:22 GMT+05:00 Tom Lane : >> 2. If compress/decompress are omitted, then we could support index-only >> scans all the time, that is a no-op

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Andrew Borodin writes: > 2017-05-28 22:22 GMT+05:00 Tom Lane : >> 2. If compress/decompress are omitted, then we could support index-only >> scans all the time, that is a no-op fetch function would work. The >> patch should cover that interaction too. >

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Thanks, Tom! 2017-05-28 22:22 GMT+05:00 Tom Lane : > Andrew Borodin writes: >> Maybe we should make compress\decompress functions optional? > > 1. You'll need to adjust the documentation (gist.sgml) not just the code. Sure, I'll check out where

Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Andrew Borodin writes: > Maybe we should make compress\decompress functions optional? 1. You'll need to adjust the documentation (gist.sgml) not just the code. 2. If compress/decompress are omitted, then we could support index-only scans all the time, that is a no-op fetch

[HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions

Hi, hackers! Currently, GiST stores each attribute in a compressed form. That is, each time attribute is written it's calling compress function, and when the attribute is accessed the decompress functions is called. Some types can't get any advantage out of this technique since the context of one