Re: Index AM change proposals, redux

From: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index AM change proposals, redux
Date: 2008-04-11 19:13:24
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0804112312030.21547@sn.sai.msu.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Tom Lane wrote:

> Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
>> Slightly offtopic. How to get benefit on tuple level ? For example,
>> we mark GiST tsearch index as lossy, while for not very big documents it's
>> actually exact and we could save a lot not rechecking them.
>
> Won't that just fall out of this? Assuming the consistent() function
> knows when the match is exact, it can set the flag properly.

Ah, yes. Looks like a new life for GiST tsearch index.

>
> regards, tom lane
>

Regards,
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru)
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Browne 2008-04-11 19:15:04 Re: Commit fest status
Previous Message Vladimir Volovich 2008-04-11 19:11:38 Re: question on how to correctly communicate with external library functions which return malloc()'ed strings