Re: Minmax indexes
| От | Claudio Freire |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Minmax indexes |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAGTBQpYxzMdONt4gk0V8XA2jJcD4uXSXXtWtWt7SsZP6esGS7A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Minmax indexes (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 7 August 2014 14:53, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Nicolas Barbier >> <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2014-08-06 Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> So, I like blockfilter a lot. I change my vote to blockfilter ;) >>> >>> +1 for blockfilter, because it stresses the fact that the "physical" >>> arrangement of rows in blocks matters for this index. >> >> I don't like that quite as well as summary, but I'd prefer either to >> the current naming. > > Yes, "summary index" isn't good. I'm not sure where the block or the > filter part comes in though, so -1 to "block filter", not least > because it doesn't have a good abbreviation (bfin??). Block filter would refer to the index property that selects blocks, not tuples, and it does so through a "filter function" (for min-max, it's a range check, but for other opclasses it could be anything).
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: