Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gokulakannan Somasundaram
Subject Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Date
Msg-id 9362e74e1002260036m7f0795bfh9bea5839f9187905@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
List pgsql-hackers
To be a bit more concrete: the typical sort of failure that you could
get from broken btree operators is failure of transitivity, that is
the comparators report A < B and B < C for some A, B, C, but do not say
that A < C when those two values are compared directly.  I don't see any
convenient way to detect that as a byproduct of normal index operations,
because you wouldn't typically have a reason to make all three
comparisons in close proximity.  Indeed, the searching and sorting
algorithms do their best to avoid making "redundant" comparisons of that
kind.

This is interesting Tom, but i am unable to understand, why it won't affect the current indexes. While insertion it might get inserted in a block and offset, and while searching it might either return no results / show a wrong place. Because ordering is required for searching also right? I definitely feel, i am missing something here.

Gokul.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication integration
Next
From: Piyush Newe
Date:
Subject: Correcting Error message