| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: store additional info in GIN index |
| Date: | 2013-03-03 14:53:15 |
| Message-ID: | 513363DB.7090304@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
The GIN changes don't seem to have progressed in some time, and some of
the most recent activity
(http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/50BFF89A.7080908@fuzzy.cz)
suggests unconvincing test results.
Is this work considered to be a dead-end - a good idea that didn't work
out in practice? Or do you think it still has merit and can be made
useful and ready for inclusion?
Given the activity level I would like to bounce this patch, either as
"returned with feedback" if you want to take another go at it post-9.3,
or as "rejected" if you think the idea won't go anywhere. Please let me
know how you think it looks.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-03-03 14:53:41 | Re: plpgsql_check_function - rebase for 9.3 |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2013-03-03 14:48:59 | Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation |