| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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 18:46:24 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTiki6weZ4c8iHVoxTe7sRGrx8V16G+7Y62K1M=mo@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> BTW, I don't try to fix incomplete splits during vacuum in the patch. That's
> perhaps a bit surprising, and probably would be easy to add, but I left it
> out for now as it's not strictly necessary.
Seems like it would be good to have this; otherwise, the split might
stay incompletely indefinitely? Would that be bad?
If we start to enlarge the bounding boxes on the higher levels of the
tree and then crash before inserting the key, is there any mechanism
for getting them back down to the minimal size?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-11-16 18:50:49 | Re: GiST insert algorithm rewrite |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-11-16 18:44:06 | Re: autovacuum maintenance_work_mem |