| From: | Antonin Houska <antonin(dot)houska(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Todo item: Support amgettuple() in GIN |
| Date: | 2013-11-29 08:54:28 |
| Message-ID: | 52985644.8070108@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/29/2013 01:13 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> When doing partial matching the code need to be able to return the union
> of all TIDs in all the matching posting trees in TID order (to be able
> to do AND and OR operations with multiple search keys later). It does
> this by traversing them posting tree after posting tree and collecting
> them all in a TIDBitmap which is later iterated over.
I think it's not a plain union. My understanding is that - to evaluate a
single key (typically array) - you first need to get all the TID streams
for that key (i.e. one posting list/tree per element of the key array)
and then iterate all these streams in parallel and 'merge' them using
consistent() function. That's how I understand ginget.c:keyGetItem().
So the problem of partial match is (IMO) that there can be too many TID
streams to merge - much more than the number of elements of the key array.
// Antonin Houska (Tony)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2013-11-29 08:58:07 | Re: docbook-xsl version for release builds |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-11-29 08:09:54 | Re: MultiXact truncation, startup et al. |