| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
| Date: | 2010-02-23 15:11:24 |
| Message-ID: | 4B83F01C.2020103@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote:
>> I looked at the postgres nbtree code. From my analysis(which
>> might be wrong!), we can implement IOTs, provided we make a decision
>> on broken data types issue.
>
> I am not familiar with this term "broken data types", and I just looked
> for it in the source code and couldn't find it.
>
> What exactly are you referring to?
I believe he's referring to the fact that once a key is inserted to an
index, it might not be possible to re-find it, if the datatype is broken
in such a way that e.g comparison operator returns a different value.
For example, today "1 < 2" returns true, but tomorrow it returns false.
The decision on that is that you need to deal with it.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-02-23 15:18:02 | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-02-23 15:08:27 | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |