Bruce Momjian wrote:
These patches will be held for 8.4:
o Grouped Index Tuples (GIT)
o Bitmap scan changes
o Stream bitmaps (API change for Group Index Tuples)
o Maintaining cluster order on insert
I believe Heikki is in agreement on this.
Yes.
--
Heikki
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
So instead of pressing to try to get something into 8.3, I would rather
we stand back and think about it some more.
I understand why you are saying hold for 8.4, but this issue came up in
the middle of the 8.3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I somehow feel that if HOT wasn't being considered for 8.3 we might have
gotten GIT, but with limited resources I think there was more focus on
HOT, perhaps rightly so.
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
These patches will be held for 8.4:
o Grouped Index Tuples (GIT)
o Bitmap scan changes
o Stream bitmaps (API change for Group Index Tuples)
o Maintaining cluster order on insert
I believe Heikki is in agreement on this.
That is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
These patches will be held for 8.4:
o Grouped Index Tuples (GIT)
o Bitmap scan changes
o Stream bitmaps (API change for Group Index Tuples)
o Maintaining cluster order on insert
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
So instead of pressing to try to get something into 8.3, I would rather
we stand back and think about it some more.
I understand why you are saying hold for 8.4, but this issue came up in
the middle of the 8.3 development cycle and
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
So instead of pressing to try to get something into 8.3, I would rather
we stand back and think about it some more.
I understand why you are saying hold for 8.4, but this issue came up in
the middle of the 8.3
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 16:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
At this
point I feel like the patch still needs some work and reshuffling before
it is in an acceptable state. The fact that there are some API changes
for which the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 16:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Heck, I'd much rather have bitmap and/or GIT than hash indexes any day.
But hash is all about the equality man!
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc.
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How hard will it be to add the infrastructure to allow new index types
to be added to the server dynamically?
INSERT INTO pg_am VALUES (...);
I don't really think we need more than that, at least not till non-core
index AMs are a whole lot thicker on the
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
At this
point I feel like the patch still needs some work and reshuffling before
it is in an acceptable state. The fact that there are some API changes
for which the patch needs to be adjusted makes me
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Hmm, do say, doesn't it seem like the lack of feedback and the failed
bitmap patch played against final development of this patch?
Yes :(. That's a one reason why I tried to help with the review of that
patch.
At this
point I feel like the patch still needs some work
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Hmm, do say, doesn't it seem like the lack of feedback and the failed
bitmap patch played against final development of this patch?
Yes :(. That's a one reason why I tried to help with the review of that
patch.
At this
point I feel
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I've started reading the GIT patch to see if I can help with the review.
As the patch stands, I tried to keep it as non-invasive as possible,
with minimum changes to existing APIs. That's because in the winter we
Alexey Klyukin wrote:
Well, then should we return to the review of your 'bitmapscan changes'
patch ? I've posted a version which applies (or applied to the cvs head
at the time of post) cleanly there:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-06/msg00204.php
Yes, that's probably a
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
At this
point I feel like the patch still needs some work and reshuffling before
it is in an acceptable state. The fact that there are some API changes
for which the patch needs to be adjusted makes me feel like we should
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I've started reading the GIT patch to see if I can help with the review.
Thanks.
First thing I notice is that there are several things that seems left
over; for example the comments in pg_proc for the new functions are
incomplete.
...
I'm also finding a certain lack
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I've started reading the GIT patch to see if I can help with the review.
As the patch stands, I tried to keep it as non-invasive as possible,
with minimum changes to existing APIs. That's because in the winter we
were discussing changes to the
Hi,
I've started reading the GIT patch to see if I can help with the review.
First thing I notice is that there are several things that seems left
over; for example the comments in pg_proc for the new functions are
incomplete.
More subtle: in _bt_findinsertloc, the test for
modifiedpage =
Another thing that would be useful would be to separate the changes to
add pgstat counters and view columns, since they are relatively minor
and could be committed separately (or not at all for 8.3, even).
--
Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org/
inflex
Oh, and the new function in bitmapset.c could use with some explanation
of what it is.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
Es filósofo el que disfruta con los enigmas (G. Coli)
---(end of broadcast)---
Hello,
I'd like to help reviewing patches, in particular the group index tupes (GIT)
patch by Heikki Linnakangas
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-02/msg01264.php).
I've spoken with Alvaro about it, he gave me several links to the threads on
hackers related to the GIT patch and I
Alexey Klyukin wrote:
What about proposition for indexam changes, I can't find any patches there ?
(http://momjian.us/mhonarc/patches/msg00125.html)
That mail is just discussion that lead to the patch below:
Is the patch for changing amgetmulti to amgetbitmap relevant to the GIT patch ?
23 matches
Mail list logo
