Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments

From: Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments
Date: 2013-10-31 07:54:06
Message-ID: 1383206046741-5776471.post@n5.nabble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gavin Flower-2 wrote
> How about being able to mark indexes:
> 'MEMORY ONLY' to make them not go to disk
> and
> 'PERSISTENT | TRANSIENT' to mark if they should be recreated on
> machine bootup?

I would love that. But:

1) I'd like to make some tests with a "memory drive", and confirm that in
fact this would help (I'm sure I tried in the past, but I don't remember the
outcome)
2) I don't know if the fact that they are in memory should be handled by the
db or not. I was thinking about something more like "RECREATE IF NOT FOUND",
that is: if the files aren't found at postgresql startup, re-create the
index...
3) I don't know how many people would be interested (and how
doable/complicated that would be, considering log-replay, replication etc
etc)

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Fast-insertion-indexes-why-no-developments-tp5776227p5776471.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2013-10-31 09:33:28 Re: Something fishy happening on frogmouth
Previous Message Leonardo Francalanci 2013-10-31 07:43:44 Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments