From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Creation of tsearch2 index is very |
Date: | 2006-01-21 18:27:53 |
Message-ID: | 18771.1137868073@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net> writes:
> At 07:23 PM 1/20/2006, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, we're trying to split an index page that's gotten full into
>> two index pages, preferably with approximately equal numbers of items in
>> each new page (this isn't a hard requirement though).
> Maybe we are over thinking this. What happens if we do the obvious
> and just make a new page and move the "last" n/2 items on the full
> page to the new page?
Search performance will go to hell in a handbasket :-(. We have to make
at least some effort to split the page in a way that will allow searches
to visit only one of the two child pages rather than both.
It's certainly true though that finding the furthest pair is not a
necessary component of that. It's reasonable if you try to visualize
the problem in 2D or 3D, but I'm not sure that that geometric intuition
holds up in such a high-dimensional space as we have here.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Vollmer | 2006-01-21 18:37:06 | Re: Creation of tsearch2 index is very slow |
Previous Message | Tony Caduto | 2006-01-21 18:16:04 | optimizing server for a 10 million row table |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Vollmer | 2006-01-21 18:37:06 | Re: Creation of tsearch2 index is very slow |
Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2006-01-21 16:33:27 | Re: [GENERAL] Creation of tsearch2 index is very |