Re: Fractal tree indexing

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fractal tree indexing
Date: 2013-02-13 16:51:14
Message-ID: 511BC482.60002@vmware.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 13.02.2013 18:43, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 02/13/2013 11:20 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> writes:
>>> The basic idea of a fractal tree index is to attach a buffer to every
>>> non-leaf page. On insertion, instead of descending all the way down to
>>> the correct leaf page, the new tuple is put on the buffer at the root
>>> page. When that buffer fills up, all the tuples in the buffer are
>>> cascaded down to the buffers on the next level pages. And recursively,
>>> whenever a buffer fills up at any level, it's flushed to the next level.
>> [ scratches head... ] What's "fractal" about that? Or is that just a
>> content-free marketing name for this technique?
>
> And if that's all it is then I have some doubt about its patentability.
> For one thing I'd be mildly surprised if there weren't prior art. But of
> course, IANAL :-)

Agreed, but IANAL either. The papers the GiST buffering build algorithm
was based pre-dates Tokutek's fractal indexes, for starters. Of course,
all I know about fractal indexes is what I've read on some presentation
slides on the 'net, so I might be missing something.

- Heikki

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Atri Sharma 2013-02-13 17:00:59 Re: Fractal tree indexing
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2013-02-13 16:48:36 Re: Fractal tree indexing