From: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | 'Simon Riggs' <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [doc fix] Really trivial fix for BRIN documentation |
Date: | 2017-02-22 01:18:04 |
Message-ID: | 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1F6A6269@G01JPEXMBYT05 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
From: Simon Riggs [mailto:simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com]
> Pushed, but using "heap" rather than "table", for clarity. Thanks for the
> patch.
Thank you for responding so quickly. I'm comfortable with "heap." On the other hand, src/backend/access/brin/README uses "table" as follows. Second, I thought users would feel more familiar with the general term "table." Third, I supposed PostgreSQL might add support for other structures for tables than heap in the future, like SQL Server provides heap (non-clustered table) and clustered tables.
At index creation time, the whole table is scanned; for each page range the
summarizing values of each indexed column and nulls bitmap are collected and
stored in the index.
I should have written the reason I chose "table." Anyway, I'm OK with heap.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2017-02-22 01:40:07 | foreign partition DDL regression tests |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-02-22 01:14:43 | Re: Bold itemized list entries |