| From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Indexam interface proposal |
| Date: | 2007-03-19 13:40:52 |
| Message-ID: | 45FE92E4.8020201@sigaev.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Right, except that flag is per operator in operator class, and what I'm
> proposing is that the index could pass a flag per tuple in the scan.
That might make sense even for GiST. Sometimes complex compressions is used in
GiST opclasses. If indexing value is rather small then it's stored in index as
is, but large value is compressed with lossy techniques. So, GiST might return a
tuple which is allowed to not recheck.
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-03-19 13:45:15 | Re: Buildfarm feature request: some way to track/classify failures |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-03-19 13:17:24 | Re: Buildfarm feature request: some way to track/classify failures |