Re: GiST insert algorithm rewrite

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Subject: Re: GiST insert algorithm rewrite
Date: 2010-11-16 20:46:15
Message-ID: 5423.1289940375@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Oh. So do the indexes just degrade over time until they eventually
> need to be REINDEX'd?

At some point you might reach a state where a reindex would be helpful.
But the same is true of btrees. I don't think this is a serious
objection, at least not unless backed by evidence that the tree often
degrades rapidly. Anyway fixing it would be material for a different
patch.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-11-16 20:50:42 Re: unlogged tables
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2010-11-16 20:40:15 Re: Per-column collation