From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com |
Cc: | "Victor Y(dot) Yegorov" <viy(at)mits(dot)lv>, "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: bitmap AM design |
Date: | 2005-03-01 18:11:00 |
Message-ID: | 19124.1109700660@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com writes:
> Tom, I posted a message about a week ago (I forget the name) about a
> persistent reference index, sort of like CTID, but basically a table
> lookup. The idea is to simulate a structure that ISAM sort of techniques
> can work in PostgreSQL.
> Eliminating the bitmap index issue for a moment, how hard would it be to
> create a reference table like index?
I didn't see the point. You cannot actually use CTID that way (at least
not without fundamentally redesigning our MVCC machinery) and anything
else you might come up with is effectively just a random unique ID that
has to be mapped through an index to find the row. I don't see the
advantage compared to any ordinary application-defined primary key.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | pgsql | 2005-03-01 18:42:09 | Re: bitmap AM design |
Previous Message | Matthias Schmidt | 2005-03-01 17:57:53 | Re: Where to see the patch queue (was Re: [PATCHES] Patch for Postmaster |