Re: [HACKERS] Remove 1MB size limit in tsvector
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Remove 1MB size limit in tsvector |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqRW1d3rcWd5syatSPWbMedhD8FDnxo5-JrmoQdC5wFVQQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Remove 1MB size limit in tsvector (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 09/11/2017 01:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Ildus Kurbangaliev >> <i.kurbangaliev@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >>> Moreover, RUM index >>> stores positions + lexemes, so it doesn't need tsvectors for ranked >>> search. As a result, tsvector becomes a storage for >>> building indexes (indexable type), not something that should be used at >>> runtime. And the change of the format doesn't affect index creation >>> time. >> >> RUM indexes, though, are not in core. >> > > Yeah, but I think Ildus has a point that this should not really matter > on indexed tsvectors. So the question is how realistic that benchmark > actually is. How likely are we to do queries on fts directly, not > through a GIN/GiST index? Particularly in performance-sensitive cases? So many questions unanswered... I am marking the patch as returned with feedback as the thread has stalled for two months now. -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: