Subject: Re: [WIP] Effective storage of duplicates in B-tree index.
To: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
References: <55E4051B.7020209@postgrespro.ru>
 <56AA2081.1080001@postgrespro.ru>
 <CAA-aLv68Ptrnk2HpHSg9wYR0c+D2AyTB+XrS671brxqQz3dH3w@mail.gmail.com>
 <56AA3E06.8040006@postgrespro.ru>
 <CAA-aLv5aQezrfh2iJD97R1sQ6nqMsR2QZ_YAzNfAOkkMgO8CFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56AB6D30.2040900@postgrespro.ru> <20160129184733.2ca9026a@fujitsu>
 <CAA-aLv7pmO41G78jfLsftsCvkXZw6dL8HZoCX9ute6nQxJv2tw@mail.gmail.com>
 <56AB9866.6050207@postgrespro.ru>
 <CAM3SWZQ3_PLQCH4w7uQ8q_f2t4HEseKTr2n0rQ5pxA18OeRTJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <56C5FCE1.1090509@postgrespro.ru> <56C5FF80.5050905@postgrespro.ru>
 <56E6B64E.6000101@pgmasters.net>
From: Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>
Message-ID: <56E84834.2070003@postgrespro.ru>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 20:36:52 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56E6B64E.6000101@pgmasters.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

14.03.2016 16:02, David Steele:
> Hi Anastasia,
>
> On 2/18/16 12:29 PM, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
>> 18.02.2016 20:18, Anastasia Lubennikova:
>>> 04.02.2016 20:16, Peter Geoghegan:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Anastasia Lubennikova
>>>> <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>  wrote:
>>>>> I fixed it in the new version (attached).
>>>
>>> Thank you for the review.
>>> At last, there is a new patch version 3.0. After some refactoring it
>>> looks much better.
>>> I described all details of the compression in this document
>>> https://goo.gl/50O8Q0 (the same text without pictures is attached in
>>> btc_readme_1.0.txt).
>>> Consider it as a rough copy of readme. It contains some notes about
>>> tricky moments of implementation and questions about future work.
>>> Please don't hesitate to comment it.
>>>
>> Sorry, previous patch was dirty. Hotfix is attached.
>
> This looks like an extremely valuable optimization for btree indexes 
> but unfortunately it is not getting a lot of attention. It still 
> applies cleanly for anyone interested in reviewing.
>

Thank you for attention.
I would be indebted to all reviewers, who can just try this patch on 
real data and workload (except WAL for now).
B-tree needs very much testing.

> It's not clear to me that you answered all of Peter's questions in 
> [1].  I understand that you've provided a README but it may not be 
> clear if the answers are in there (and where).

I described in README all the points Peter asked.
But I see that it'd be better to answer directly.
Thanks for reminding, I'll do it tomorrow.

> Also, at the end of the README it says:
>
> 13. Xlog. TODO.
>
> Does that mean the patch is not yet complete?

Yes, you're right.
Frankly speaking, I supposed that someone will help me with that stuff,
but now I almost completed it. I'll send updated patch in the next letter.

I'm still doubtful about some patch details. I mentioned them in readme 
(bold type).
But they are mostly about future improvements.

-- 
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers