| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: BRIN bloom indexes |
| Date: | 2017-10-27 12:55:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20171027125508.afd2pj7jkqcal76f@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Not sure "a number of in-core opclasses" is a good reason to (not) add
> new ones. Also, we already have two built-in BRIN opclasses (minmax and
> inclusion).
>
> In general, "BRIN bloom" can be packed as a contrib module (at least I
> believe so). That's not the case for the "BRIN multi-range" which also
> requires some changes to some code in brin.c (but the rest can be moved
> to contrib module, of course).
I was rather thinking that if we can make this very robust against the
index growing out of proportion, we should consider ditching the
original minmax and replace it with multirange minmax, which seems like
it'd have much better behavior.
I don't see any reason to put any of this in contrib.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-10-27 12:55:41 | Re: Re: protocol version negotiation (Re: Libpq PGRES_COPY_BOTH - version compatibility) |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2017-10-27 12:54:26 | Re: parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures |