Re: GIN fast insert
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GIN fast insert |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1235503711.18299.1.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GIN fast insert (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: GIN fast insert
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 00:18 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > It only took me about 5 minutes to come up with a test case against CVS > HEAD where disabling index scans resulted in a significant dropoff in > performance. Here it is: On the other hand, Teodor showed a typical use case and a very substantial performance gain: http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/497F4606.6070303@sigaev.ru My impression is that GIN is used almost entirely for full text search. Even though GIN is actually quite general (as the BTree patch shows), the current users we have to worry about are a fairly narrow group (correct me if I'm wrong here). I wonder how many people really use GIN with non-bitmap scans for some benefit? And even if the benefit exists, does the planner have a way to identify those cases reliably, or does it have to be done manually? Regards,Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: