Re: [BUGS] BUG #14155: bloom index error with unlogged table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: [BUGS] BUG #14155: bloom index error with unlogged table
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwb+7YXpfs1SFzRh7i-UrNC0=R8eHhFGCL6S=OaMQLU1vg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] BUG #14155: bloom index error with unlogged table  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] BUG #14155: bloom index error with unlogged table  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:35 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>> Actually, the docs could be more polished.
>
> I think the docs could stand to be rewritten from scratch ;-).  But
> upthread there was an offer to work on them if we made the code behavior
> saner.  I've done the latter part, I don't want to do the former.

I have finally given a shot at improving the docs with the attached.
Comments are welcome.

​It would be nice to give guidance on selecting a bit size for columns and a signature length​.  Yes, Wikipedia covers the topic but to get the reader started some discussion of the relevant trade-offs when using larger numbers than the default would be nice.  I don't suspect using smaller the default values is apt to be worthwhile...

David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14155: bloom index error with unlogged table
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Problem with dumping bloom extension