Re: Minmax indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Minmax indexes
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMLpYQ3fG3VMjX959zr2Gf-Rc+J9Up=jd4tre83ce=7ndw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Minmax indexes  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Minmax indexes
Re: Minmax indexes
Re: Minmax indexes
Re: Minmax indexes
Re: Minmax indexes
Re: Minmax indexes
List pgsql-hackers
On 7 August 2014 14:53, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Nicolas Barbier
> <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2014-08-06 Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> So, I like blockfilter a lot. I change my vote to blockfilter ;)
>>
>> +1 for blockfilter, because it stresses the fact that the "physical"
>> arrangement of rows in blocks matters for this index.
>
> I don't like that quite as well as summary, but I'd prefer either to
> the current naming.

Yes, "summary index" isn't good. I'm not sure where the block or the
filter part comes in though, so -1 to "block filter", not least
because it doesn't have a good abbreviation (bfin??).

A better description would be "block range index" since we are
indexing a range of blocks (not just one block). Perhaps a better one
would be simply "range index", which we could abbreviate to RIN or
BRIN.

-- Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Append to a GUC parameter ?
Next
From: Claudio Freire
Date:
Subject: Re: Minmax indexes