Re: plans for bitmap indexes?
От | Mark Kirkwood |
---|---|
Тема | Re: plans for bitmap indexes? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 41759AA8.3000502@coretech.co.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: plans for bitmap indexes? ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: plans for bitmap indexes?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote: > >>I believe that the benefit of on-disk bitmap indexes is supposed to be >>reduced storage size (compared to btree). >> >> >> >The main problem is the need for the table to be read-only. Until we have >partitioning, we wouldn't be able to easily guarantee parts of a table as >being (effectively) read-only. > > > I don't believe that read only is required. The update/insert performance impact of bimap indexes is however very high (in Oracle's implementation anyway) - to the point where many sites drop them before adding in new data, and recreated 'em afterwards! In the advent that there is a benefit for the small on-disk footprint, the insert/update throughput implications will need to be taken into account. cheers Mark
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: