From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | David Scott <davids(at)apptechsys(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: No heap lookups on index |
Date: | 2006-01-19 22:47:13 |
Message-ID: | 1137710833.3069.89.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 20:13 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Come to think of it, the idea also seems to map nicely into bitmap index
> scans: the index will directly hand back a list of potential pages to
> look at, but they are all marked "lossy" because the index doesn't know
> exactly which tuple(s) on the target pages match the query. The
> existing bitmap-heap-scan code can take it from there.
Yes, I've privately suggested this solution in that context.
I think there is enough meat there to make this topic worth discussing
further, but not on list again just yet.
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Doug McNaught | 2006-01-19 22:47:33 | Re: Upgrade Problem: 7.4.3 -> 8.1.2 |
Previous Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2006-01-19 22:46:54 | Re: A tale of two similar databases |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2006-01-19 22:47:40 | PostgreSQL and shared memory. |
Previous Message | Andrew - Supernews | 2006-01-19 22:40:41 | Bug: random() can return 1.0 |