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: 2013-11-13 15:30:53
Message-ID: 1384356653646-5778171.post@n5.nabble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs wrote
>> Can you CLUSTER
>> against a minmax index?
>
> Not in this release, at least in my understanding. It's not yet
> possible to do an ordered fetch, so the cluster scan probably won't
> work.

As per the patch I helped writing, CLUSTER should use the
sequential heap scan+sort when "it makes sense".
So I think that if the index is not able to do an ordered fetch,
CLUSTER should fall back to scan+sort automatically (which is
what you want in a large table anyway).

Obviously, that should be tested.

--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Fast-insertion-indexes-why-no-developments-tp5776227p5778171.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 Andrew Dunstan 2013-11-13 15:32:23 Re: additional json functionality
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2013-11-13 15:28:22 pg_upgrade misreports full disk