Re: Block B-Tree concept
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Block B-Tree concept |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 15221.1159539811@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Block B-Tree concept (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Block B-Tree concept
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes: > Imagine a normal B-tree just like what we have now. But when there is > more than one tuple on the same heap page with consecutive index keys, > we represent all of them in a single index tuple that contains the key > of the first one of them, and a (run-length encoded) bitmap of the > OffsetNumbers. At first I thought that was a typo, and instead of "consecutive" you meant to write "equal". I gather from the later statement > I'm not very interested in the case where you have a lot of equal keys, > I think the bitmap index am is more suitable for that. that indeed you meant to write "consecutive", and I've got a problem with that: define "consecutive". In a datatype independent fashion, please. I also wonder how you are going to implement splitting and merging of runs, which will certainly be necessary if this isn't to be a constantly-requires-REINDEX thing. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: