| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: prefix btree implementation |
| Date: | 2005-10-07 02:43:54 |
| Message-ID: | 200510070243.j972hsS01351@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 03:40:43PM -0700, Qingqing Zhou wrote:
> > We do the prefix sharing when we build up index only, never on the fly.
>
> So are you saying that inserts of new data wouldn't make any use of
> this? ISTM that greatly reduces the usefulness, though I'm not objecting
> because compression during build is probably better than none at all. Is
> there a technical reason compression can't be used during normal
> operations?
Added to TODO:
* Consider compressing indexes by storing key prefix values shared by
several rows as a single index entry
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Qingqing Zhou | 2005-10-07 03:19:45 | Re: prefix btree implementation |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-10-07 02:38:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Patching dblink.c to avoid warning about open transaction |