| From: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: KNN-GiST with recheck |
| Date: | 2014-11-28 09:29:28 |
| Message-ID: | CAPpHfdt6KM965n9ZrHmNcXZ6WkfSPX3KYta1rjbms4xfmghMPw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > This patch was split from thread:
> >
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAPpHfdscOX5an71nHd8WSUH6GNOCf=V7wgDaTXdDd9=goN-gfA@mail.gmail.com
> >
> > I've split it to separate thead, because it's related to partial sort
> only
> > conceptually not technically. Also I renamed it to "knn-gist-recheck"
> from
> > "partial-knn" as more appropriate name. In the attached version docs are
> > updated. Possible weak point of this patch design is that it fetches heap
> > tuple from GiST scan. However, I didn't receive any notes about its
> design,
> > so, I'm going to put it to commitfest.
>
>
> The partial sort thing is not in the current 2014-10 commitfest
> (although this patch is). Is that intentional?
It's not. I just didn't revise partial sort yet :(
------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2014-11-28 09:52:42 | Re: Marginal performance improvement: replace bms_first_member loops |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2014-11-28 09:27:11 | Re: Fillfactor for GIN indexes |