| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor) |
| Date: | 2011-12-22 07:52:18 |
| Message-ID: | 1324540338.7608.85.camel@jdavis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2011-12-20 at 13:22 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> Studying this question little more I found that current approach of
> range indexing can be dramatically inefficient in some cases. It's not
> because of penalty or split implementation, but because of approach
> itself. Mapping intervals to two-dimensional space produce much better
> results in case of high-overlapping ranges and "@>", "<@" operators
> with low selectivity.
>
Thank you for testing this. I agree that your approach is much better
especially dealing with widely varying range sizes, etc. My approach
really only tackled the simple (and hopefully common) case when the
ranges are about the same size.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson | 2011-12-22 08:07:45 | Re: Typed hstore proposal |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2011-12-22 07:46:46 | Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor) |