Re: Covering GiST indexes
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Covering GiST indexes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WznTXH3mtyOmkMOMxKq5w1r2tt8XT2FKBUbvuva-D-fDyw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Covering GiST indexes (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:00 AM, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > I have two concerns. > First one is about INDEX_AM_RESERVED_BIT. > B-tree uses it as a base for prefix truncation (I'm not quite sure why it is usually called suffix truncation, but thisis a matter for other thread). Since you brought it up, and since I pushed that particular terminology, I should acknowledge that the original 1977 Bayer paper on suffix truncation calls a B-Tree with suffix truncation a prefix B-Tree. However, more recent work seems to consistently refer to the technique as suffix truncation, while also referring to more advanced techniques for compressing (not truncating) leaf tuples as prefix compression. I suggested suffix truncation because it seemed to be the dominant way of referring to the technique. And, because it seemed more logical: the suffix is what gets truncated away. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: