Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Leonardo Francalanci
Subject Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments
Date
Msg-id 1383132226.89556.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> What is the reason for needing such fast access to individual groups
> of records? Sure sounds like the NSA or similar ;-)


Users need to search all calls originated from/to a user or from/to a specific mobile phone to answer/analyze
customers'probl... ok, I give up: I work for the NSA ;) 

> In terms of generality, do you think its worth a man year of developer
> effort to replicate what you have already achieved? Who would pay?


1) I haven't achieved what I need: realtime indexing. I can't query the "current 15 minutes" table efficiently. Plus,
K*log(N)is not that great when you have a lot of K. 
2) I'm not suggesting that this is top priority. I'm asking if there's something else, other than "we don't have time
forthis", that I don't know. In fact, I don't even know if those indexes types would really help in my (specific) case.
That'swhy my original question was "why aren't there developments in this area": I didn't mean to imply someone should
doit. I just wanted to know if those indexes were already discussed (and maybe dismissed for some reason) in the
past...




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments
Next
From: Kaare Rasmussen
Date:
Subject: Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments