Re: Extreme bloating of intarray GiST indexes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extreme bloating of intarray GiST indexes
Date: 2011-05-03 05:07:14
Message-ID: 11677.1304399234@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Tom, Alexander,
> So we are using gist_intbig_ops, so that's not the issue.

> Using pgstattuple might be a bit of a challenge. The client doesn't
> have it installed, and I can't pull it from Yum without also upgrading
> PostgreSQL, since Yum doesn't stock old versions AFAIK.

And updating Postgres to latest minor release is a bad thing why?
I can't believe you're not holding your client's feet to the fire
about running an old version, quite independently of the fact that
they need that contrib module.

But having said that, what you say makes no sense at all. They have
intarray installed, so they have postgresql-contrib. I know of no
Yum-accessible distributions in which intarray and pgstattuple wouldn't
be delivered in the same RPM.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson 2011-05-03 06:46:26 DLL export with mingw-w64: currently a no-op
Previous Message Vlad Arkhipov 2011-05-03 04:36:36 Re: Predicate locking