Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2013-03-03 Thread Craig Ringer
On 03/04/2013 01:29 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: Given the activity level I would like to bounce this patch, either as "returned with feedback" if you want to take another go at it post-9.3, or as "rejected" if you think the idea won't go anywhere. Please let me know how you think

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2013-03-03 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > The GIN changes don't seem to have progressed in some time, and some of > the most recent activity > (http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/50bff89a.7080...@fuzzy.cz) > suggests unconvincing test results. > Actually, _most_ recent acitivi

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2013-03-03 Thread Craig Ringer
The GIN changes don't seem to have progressed in some time, and some of the most recent activity (http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/50bff89a.7080...@fuzzy.cz) suggests unconvincing test results. Is this work considered to be a dead-end - a good idea that didn't work out in practice? Or do

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-23 Thread Tomas Vondra
Hi! On 22.12.2012 17:15, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > I'm not saying this is a perfect benchmark, but the differences (of > querying) are pretty huge. Not sure where this difference comes from, > but it seems to be quite consistent (I usually get +-10% results, which > is negligible

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-22 Thread Alexander Korotkov
Hi! On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > Then I've run a simple benchmarking script, and the results are not as > good as I expected, actually I'm getting much worse performance than > with the original GIN index. > > The following table contains the time of loading the data (no

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-05 Thread Tomas Vondra
On 5.12.2012 09:10, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Tomas Vondra > wrote: > > Thanks for bug report. It is fixed in the attached patch. Hi, I gave it another try and this time it went fine - I didn't get any segfault when loading the data, which

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-05 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 4.12.2012 20:12, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > Hi! > > > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Tomas Vondra > > wrote: > > > > I've tried to apply the patch with the current HEAD, but I'm getting > > segfaults whe

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 05:35:27PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > Maybe we can mark GIN indexes as invalid after pg_upgrade somehow, so > > that they require reindex in the new cluster before they can be used for > > queries or index updates. > > Bumping the version number in

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: > Maybe we can mark GIN indexes as invalid after pg_upgrade somehow, so > that they require reindex in the new cluster before they can be used for > queries or index updates. Bumping the version number in the GIN metapage would be sufficient. regard

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Tomas Vondra
On 4.12.2012 20:12, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Hi! > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Tomas Vondra > wrote: > > I've tried to apply the patch with the current HEAD, but I'm getting > segfaults whenever VACUUM runs (either called directly or from autovac > work

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 05:35:24PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > This means to have two versions of code which deals with posting trees and > > lists. For me it seems unlikely we have resources for maintenance of this. > > Witness how GIN has gone with unfixed bugs for months, even though > pat

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alexander Korotkov escribió: > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Korotkov > > wrote: > > > Patch completely changes storage in posting lists and leaf pages of > > posting > > > trees. It uses varbyte encoding for BlockNumber and O

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > Patch completely changes storage in posting lists and leaf pages of > posting > > trees. It uses varbyte encoding for BlockNumber and OffsetNumber. > > BlockNumber are stored inc

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Alexander Korotkov
Hi! On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > I've tried to apply the patch with the current HEAD, but I'm getting > segfaults whenever VACUUM runs (either called directly or from autovac > workers). > > The patch applied cleanly against 9b3ac49e and needed a minor fix when > applied

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Andres Freund
On 2012-12-04 10:04:03 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 12/4/12 9:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Korotkov > > wrote: > >> Patch completely changes storage in posting lists and leaf pages of posting > >> trees. It uses varbyte encoding for BlockNumber and Off

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Josh Berkus
On 12/4/12 9:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: >> Patch completely changes storage in posting lists and leaf pages of posting >> trees. It uses varbyte encoding for BlockNumber and OffsetNumber. >> BlockNumber are stored incremental in page. A

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Patch completely changes storage in posting lists and leaf pages of posting > trees. It uses varbyte encoding for BlockNumber and OffsetNumber. > BlockNumber are stored incremental in page. Additionally one bit of > OffsetNumber is reser

Re: [HACKERS] WIP: store additional info in GIN index

2012-12-01 Thread Tomas Vondra
On 18.11.2012 22:54, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Hackers, > > Patch completely changes storage in posting lists and leaf pages of > posting trees. It uses varbyte encoding for BlockNumber and > OffsetNumber. BlockNumber are stored incremental in page. Additionally > one bit of OffsetNumber is rese