Re: pgsql is 75 times faster with my new index scan - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From devik@cdi.cz
Subject Re: pgsql is 75 times faster with my new index scan
Date
Msg-id 39D1ABDA.4D26105B@cdi.cz
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: pgsql is 75 times faster with my new index scan  ("Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Why not implement *true* CLUSTER?
> With cluster, all heap tuples will be in cluster index.

It would be nice. It's pity that pg AMs are not general.
There is no simple way to use btree instead of heap. But
it would help.
But using values from index is good idea too because you
can have table with many columns and aggregate query which
needs only two columns.
The it will be MUCH faster to create secondary index which
is much smaller than heap and use values from it.

Vadim where can I found some code from upcoming WAL ?
I'm thinking about implementing special ranked b-tree
which will store precomputed aggregate values (like
cnt,min,max,sum) in btree node keys. It can be then
used for extremely fast evaluation of aggregates. But
in case of MVCC it is more complicated and I'd like
to see how it would be affected by WAL.

devik




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Louis-David Mitterrand
Date:
Subject: Re: function crashes backend
Next
From: devik@cdi.cz
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql is 75 times faster with my new index scan