Re: [RFC] Minmax indexes
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [RFC] Minmax indexes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21683.1371251267@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [RFC] Minmax indexes (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [RFC] Minmax indexes
Re: [RFC] Minmax indexes |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: >> To avoid this, a table having a minmax index would be >> configured so that inserts only go to the page(s) at the end of the table; this >> avoids frequent invalidation of ranges in the middle of the table. We provide >> a table reloption that tweaks the FSM behavior, so that summarized pages are >> not candidates for insertion. > We haven't had an index type which modifies table insertion behavior > before, and I'm not keen to start now; imagine having two indexes on the > same table each with their own, conflicting, requirements. I agree; such a restriction is a nonstarter for a secondary index. I don't believe that hacking the FSM would be sufficient to guarantee the required behavior, either. We've talked a lot about index-organized tables in the past. How much of the use case for this would be subsumed by a feature like that? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: