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

maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch

From: "phb07(at)apra(dot)asso(dot)fr" <phb07(at)apra(dot)asso(dot)fr>
To: "pgsql-performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch
Date: 2009-10-19 19:32:18
Message-ID: 20091019193218.DA7964B1C71@smtp2-g21.free.fr (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Hi all,

The current discussion about "Indexes on low cardinality columns" let me discover this 
"grouped index tuples" patch (http://community.enterprisedb.com/git/) and its associated 
"maintain cluster order" patch (http://community.enterprisedb.com/git/maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch)

This last patch seems to cover the TODO item named "Automatically maintain clustering on a table". 
As this patch is not so new (2007), I would like to know why it has not been yet integrated in a standart version of PG (not well finalized ? not totaly sure ? not corresponding to the way the core team would like to address this item ?) and if there are good chance to see it committed in a near future.

I currently work for a large customer who is migrating a lot of databases used by an application that currently largely takes benefit from well clustered tables, especialy for batch processing. The migration brings a lot of benefits. In fact, the only regression, compared to the old RDBMS, is the fact that tables organisation level decreases more quickly, generating more frequent heavy cluster operations. 

So this "maintain cluster order" patch (and may be "git" also) should fill the lack. But leaving the way of the "standart PG" is not something very attractive...

Regards. 
Philippe Beaudoin.





Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2009-10-19 22:05:53
Subject: Re: maintain_cluster_order_v5.patch
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-10-19 19:10:56
Subject: Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY

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