Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor)

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor)
Date: 2011-12-22 07:52:18
Message-ID: 1324540338.7608.85.camel@jdavis (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2011-12-20 at 13:22 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> 
> Studying this question little more I found that current approach of
> range indexing can be dramatically inefficient in some cases. It's not
> because of penalty or split implementation, but because of approach
> itself. Mapping intervals to two-dimensional space produce much better
> results in case of high-overlapping ranges and "@>", "<@" operators
> with low selectivity. 
> 
Thank you for testing this. I agree that your approach is much better
especially dealing with widely varying range sizes, etc. My approach
really only tackled the simple (and hopefully common) case when the
ranges are about the same size.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Johann 'Myrkraverk' OskarssonDate: 2011-12-22 08:07:45
Subject: Re: Typed hstore proposal
Previous:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2011-12-22 07:46:46
Subject: Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group