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

Re: On-disk bitmap index patch

From: "Luke Lonergan" <LLonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
To: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>,"Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>,"Jie Zhang" <jzhang(at)greenplum(dot)com>,"Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>,"Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,"Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: On-disk bitmap index patch
Date: 2006-07-29 04:34:57
Message-ID: 3E37B936B592014B978C4415F90D662D03E6CE6D@MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Mark, 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc [mailto:mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc] 
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 9:26 PM
> 
> But irrefutable? Irrefutable is not true. :-)

How about unrefuted.  The evidence has not been refuted, and not
directly discussed or discounted.

BTREE can not be optimized to produce the results we've presented, the
discussion about char(n) datatypes was irrelevant as we had shown
results for INT, numeric and char/varchar and they were all dramatically
better than BTREE.

I am hopeful this discussion takes a rapid turn toward the quantitative
assessment of the results.

- Luke


Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2006-07-29 06:50:05
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 8.2 features?
Previous:From: markDate: 2006-07-29 04:26:23
Subject: Re: On-disk bitmap index patch

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