Re: Indexing - comparison of tree structures
От | Sascha Kuhl |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Indexing - comparison of tree structures |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPvVvKBYEkYCc6nHMqLPLhvL38HptUyy-izNKyvXVy8S=ubDSQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Indexing - comparison of tree structures (Sascha Kuhl <yogidabanli@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Indexing - comparison of tree structures
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Where I can I find research on trees and indexing related to postgresql?
Sascha Kuhl <yogidabanli@gmail.com> schrieb am Mo., 27. Mai 2019, 11:14:
Can you bring me to the research showing b-tree is equally performant? Is postgres taking this research into account?Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 25. Mai 2019, 02:15:T-tree (and variants) are index types commonly associated with in-memory database management systems and rarely, if-ever, used with on-disk databases. There has been a lot of research in regard to more modern cache conscious/oblivious b-trees that perform equally or better than t-tree. What’s the use-case?--On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 5:38 AM Sascha Kuhl <yogidabanli@gmail.com> wrote:Hi,I compared two data structures realistically by time, after estimating big O. T-tree outperforms b-tree, which is commonly used, for a medium size table. Lehmann and Carey showed the same, earlier.Can you improve indexing by this?UnderstandablySascha KuhlJonah H. Harris
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: