Re: [PATCH] bitmap indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: [PATCH] bitmap indexes
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1zUjrG=5RRLJSELrmTXXDg177aLy-2264sXXOD7zQiM0A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] bitmap indexes  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] bitmap indexes
List pgsql-hackers



On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Hi,

Here are some quick items while skimming this patch.  I am looking at
commit 6448de29d from your github repo, branch bmi.

What's with the pg_bitmapindex stuff in pg_namespace.h?  It doesn't seem
to be used anywhere.

This led me to research how these indexes are stored.  I note that what
we're doing here is to create another regular table and a btree index on
top of it, and those are the ones that actually store the index data.
This seems grotty and completely unlike the way we do things elsewhere
(compare GIN indexes which have rbtrees inside them).


+1 on that.  I don't know about grottiness, but it certainly seems like it would deadlock like crazy.  Which another product's bitmap indexes are infamous for, but since we don't need to store visibility information in our indexes, hopefully we can do better.

Cheers,

Jeff

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: record identical operator
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: FW: REVIEW: Allow formatting in log_line_prefix