| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: TODO list updates |
| Date: | 2015-10-16 14:43:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20151016144310.GE3391@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Probably the most controvertial change was to move on-disk bitmap
> indexes to the "not wanted" section, though I kept the links in case we
> change our minds. I just can't see how they would be a win with GIN and
> in-memory bitmaps.
Yeah, I recall we discussed bitmap indexes a lot and we found there
wasn't a lot of room to use them because GIN is just too good, it seems.
Also, the patches that were developed had a number of issues. Anyone
wanting to develop bitmap indexes would probably be better off starting
from scratch.
> (I don't think BRIN indexes help for on-disk bitmap use-cases, do
> they?)
No, they don't. I expect BRIN to be very bad in a limited domain (which
is where bitmap indexes are supposed to shine), except under specific
conditions.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2015-10-16 14:49:05 | Re: TODO list updates |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-10-16 14:29:48 | Re: [RFC] overflow checks optimized away |