Re: Pluggable Indexes (was Re: rmgr hooks (v2))
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Pluggable Indexes (was Re: rmgr hooks (v2)) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1232596175.1426.8.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Pluggable Indexes (was Re: rmgr hooks (v2)) (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Pluggable Indexes (was Re: rmgr hooks (v2))
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 17:49 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 18:24 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Bruce Lindsay, IBM Fellow and long term DB guru was interviewed in 2005: > Q: If you magically had enough extra time to do one additional thing at > work that you're not doing now, what would it be? > > "I think I would work on indexing a little harder". > > (He mentions XML indexing, multi-dimensional indexing etc) > [Taken from SIGMOD Record, June 2005] I am curious. I read this whole current thread. What is "wrong" with the patch? As I understand it it does not increase complexity. It appears to only expose (or perhaps abstract?) existing functionality into a usable API that is not dependent on something being in core. Imagine if at some point to develop new index types or perhaps single purpose modified index types all you needed was knowhow, pgxs and too much time. Unless there is something "wrong" with this patch I say we need to stop arguing semantics and apply it. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: