Re: plans for bitmap indexes?

From: Yann Michel <yann-postgresql(at)spline(dot)de>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Andre Maasikas <andre(at)abs(dot)ee>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: plans for bitmap indexes?
Date: 2004-10-27 14:44:12
Message-ID: 20041027144412.GA21431@uff.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 10:13:56AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
>
> There's a logical separation between the idea of index methods and table
> storage mechanisms. Trying to implement something like this that breaks that
> abstraction will only make things far more confusing.
>
> I think what you're trying to accomplish is better accomplished through
> partitioned tables. Then the user can decide which keys to use to partition
> the data and the optimizer can use the data to completely exclude some
> partitions from consideration. And it wouldn't interfere with indexes to
> access the data within a partition.

this is not always the truth. In datawarehouosing applications you often
use data paritioning (time based) and bitmap indexes for fast
star-transformations. A very efficient way to solve that ist using
bitmap indexes.

Regards,
Yann

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-10-27 14:50:19 Re: rmtree() failure on Windows
Previous Message Reini Urban 2004-10-27 14:44:07 src/timezone/pgtz __imp__my_exec_path