Block B-tree etc. (was Re: Introducing an advanced Frequent Update)

From: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Luke Lonergan" <LLonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
Cc: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Block B-tree etc. (was Re: Introducing an advanced Frequent Update)
Date: 2006-11-07 09:51:21
Message-ID: 45505719.1070602@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Simon,
>
> Bring it on! We at GP have been evaluating various approaches to index
> organized tables which unify index with heap storage to solve some of
> the problems you mention. Split index and heap is a big issue in
> Postgres and we'd all welcome a good solution to it, even for limited
> circumstances like single index organization or the like.

I don't think Simon's proposal is meant to address that issue, but did
you follow the thread I started in September about Block B-Tree index:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-09/msg02041.php

That's our plan to achieve speedups that other DBMS's have achieved with
Index-Organized-Tables or Clustered Indexes. We're running initial
performance tests of it as we speak, and if all goes well we're hoping
to get that into PostgreSQL 8.3.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-11-07 10:03:42 Re: Index ignored with "is not distinct from", 8.2 beta2
Previous Message Brendan Jurd 2006-11-07 06:56:08 Re: Uncleared result sets in describeOneTableDetails()