From: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: A GIN index internals question |
Date: | 2013-12-27 15:48:14 |
Message-ID: | 52BDA13E.3030505@proxel.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/27/2013 08:22 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can a posting item / ItemPointer belonging to posting list/tree of
> some entry "stored" in a GIN index be "lossy"? If yes, under what
> circumstances would such a lossy ItemPointer be included for the
> entry?
>
> I got an impression that there may be some lossy ItemPointers stored
> in a GIN index while reading keyGetItem() code in
> src/backend/access/gin/ginget.c
No, they cannot be lossy. The reason keyGetItem() need to handle lossy
pointers is because partial matching collects all TIDs from the posting
trees matched by a key into a tidbitmap. This tidbitmap becomes lossy if
the matching TIDs do not fit into the workmem.
--
Andreas Karlsson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christian Convey | 2013-12-27 15:55:28 | Question about Lockhart's book |
Previous Message | Joseph Kregloh | 2013-12-27 14:50:44 | Re: pg_upgrade & tablespaces |