| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: B-Tree index builds, CLUSTER, and sortsupport |
| Date: | 2014-11-05 16:36:02 |
| Message-ID: | 545A51F2.1070301@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/10/14, 7:26 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Both Robert and Heikki expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that
> B-Tree index builds don't use sortsupport. Because B-Tree index builds
> cannot really use the "onlyKey" optimization, the historic oversight
> of not supporting B-Tree builds (and CLUSTER) might have been at least
> a little understandable [1]. But with the recent work on sortsupport
> for text, it's likely that B-Tree index builds will be missing out on
> rather a lot by not taking advantage of sortsupport.
>
> Attached patch modifies tuplesort to correct this oversight. What's
> really nice about it is that there is actually a net negative code
> footprint:
Did anything ever happen with this?
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-11-05 16:38:14 | Re: tracking commit timestamps |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2014-11-05 16:34:40 | Re: tracking commit timestamps |