Re: GiST index performance - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Matthew Wakeling
Subject Re: GiST index performance
Date
Msg-id alpine.DEB.2.00.0904201503570.22330@aragorn.flymine.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GiST index performance  (Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>)
Responses Re: GiST index performance  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> I have done a bit of investigation, and I think I might have found the
> smoking gun I was looking for.

I have found a bug in the contrib package seg, which has been copied into
the bioseg data type as well. It causes the index to be created with
horribly bad unselective trees, so that when a search is performed many of
the branches of the tree need to be followed. This explanation does not
extend to btree_gist, so I will have to further investigate that. Apply
the following patch to contrib/seg/seg.c:

*** seg.c    2006-09-10 18:36:51.000000000 +0100
--- seg.c_new    2009-04-20 15:02:52.000000000 +0100
***************
*** 426,432 ****
           else
           {
               datum_r = union_dr;
!             size_r = size_alpha;
               *right++ = i;
               v->spl_nright++;
           }
--- 426,432 ----
           else
           {
               datum_r = union_dr;
!             size_r = size_beta;
               *right++ = i;
               v->spl_nright++;
           }


Matthew

--
 The early bird gets the worm. If you want something else for breakfast, get
 up later.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Rafael Domiciano
Date:
Subject: SQL With Dates
Next
From: Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL With Dates