| From: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)alcove(dot)com(dot)au>, "Jie Zhang" <jzhang(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "Ayush Parashar" <aparashar(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: On-disk bitmap index patch |
| Date: | 2006-07-24 00:35:37 |
| Message-ID: | C0E963E9.2AA43%llonergan@greenplum.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom,
On 7/23/06 5:25 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> If the column is sufficiently low cardinality, you might as well just do
> a seqscan --- you'll be hitting most of the heap's pages anyway. I'm
> still waiting to be convinced that there's a sweet spot wide enough to
> justify supporting another index AM. (I'm also wondering whether this
> doesn't overlap the use-case for GIN.)
We presented them at the Postgres Anniversary summit talk (Bruce M. was
there) and the reaction was let's get this into 8.2 because many people
there (more than 5) really wanted to use it as a standard feature.
A version of the slides with only the bitmap index results are located here:
http://intranet.greenplum.com/bitmap-index-perf-ayush.ppt.
- Luke
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Lor | 2006-07-24 00:52:12 | Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-07-24 00:25:18 | Re: On-disk bitmap index patch |