| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Indirect indexes |
| Date: | 2016-11-12 17:28:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20161112172818.s55s5xxohg5enmbj@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2016-11-01 01:43:31 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I propose we introduce the concept of "indirect indexes".
>
> This is a WIP non-functional patch for indirect indexes. I've been
> distracted from working on it for some time already and will be off-line
> for half this month yet, but since this was discussed and seems to be
> considered a welcome idea, I am posting it for those who want to have a
> look at what I'm doing.
I see that this patch has a CF entry, but I'm unclear what reviewer
ought to do at the current state? There's a lot of stuff closer to
being committable in this fest...
Regards,
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2016-11-12 17:30:12 | Re: Remove the comment on the countereffectiveness of large shared_buffers on Windows |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-11-12 17:17:10 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Change the way that LWLocks for extensions are allocated. |