Re: knngist - 0.8

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Perhaps we should think of pg_amop not so much
>>> as a way to tell the AM what to do, but just a way to tell it what
>>> operator is logically involved without relying on the name or OID.
>>
>> I already think of it that way ...
>
> OK.

Thinking about it that way, perhaps we could add an integer column
amop_whats_it_good_for that gets used as a bit field. That wouldn't
require changing the index structure, although it might break some
other things.

The core KNNGIST patch is actually quite small, actually. Excluding a
lot of not-very-interesting changes to pg_amop.h, it's just over 300
lines of new code, about half of which is in indxpath.c. If we could
get this issue of how to structure the catalogs resolved, it seems to
me that we might be able to see our way to committing that part of
this work fairly quickly.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company