| From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Rusty Conover <rconover(at)infogears(dot)com>, psql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> |
| Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] GIST versus GIN indexes for intarrays |
| Date: | 2009-02-13 13:12:53 |
| Message-ID: | 499571D5.6000906@sigaev.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
> The short-term workaround for Rusty is probably to create his GIN
> index using the intarray-provided gin__int_ops opclass. But it
Right
> seems to me that we ought to get rid of intarray's @> and <@ operators
> and have the module depend on the core anyarray operators, just as we
> have already done for = and <>. Comments?
Agree, will do. Although built-in anyarray operators have ~N^2 behaviour while
intarray's version - only N*log(N)
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-02-13 14:02:54 | Re: GIN fast insert |
| Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2009-02-13 13:11:16 | Re: pg_upgrade project status |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rajesh Kumar Mallah | 2009-02-13 13:30:50 | dissimilar drives in Raid10 , does it make difference ? |
| Previous Message | Alexander Staubo | 2009-02-13 11:53:12 | I/O increase after upgrading to 8.3.5 |