X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB1AF9DCD7C for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:28:50 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 19530-01-2 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:28:41 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from smtp.nildram.co.uk (smtp.nildram.co.uk [195.112.4.54]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6CF9DCD75 for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:28:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.0.4] (unknown [84.12.183.55]) by smtp.nildram.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB0026C387; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:28:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: Should Oracle outperform PostgreSQL on a complex From: Simon Riggs To: Mark Kirkwood Cc: Tom Lane , Bruce Momjian , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Stenslet , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <43A5DF23.5010504@paradise.net.nz> References: <200512170428.jBH4S2W23715@candle.pha.pa.us> <1134810953.2964.117.camel@localhost.localdomain> <8627.1134843222@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1134913732.2964.164.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43A5DF23.5010504@paradise.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 22:28:37 +0000 Message-Id: <1134944917.2964.226.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.028 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.028] X-Spam-Score: 0.028 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/447 X-Sequence-Number: 16268 On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 11:13 +1300, Mark Kirkwood wrote: > > My understanding: Teradata and DB2 use this. > > FWIW - I think DB2 uses the successive fact RID buildup (i.e method 2), > unfortunately I think you're right; I was thinking about that point too because DB2 doesn't have index-organised tables (well, sort of: MDC). I was confused because IBM seem to have a patent on (1), even though it seems exactly like the original NCR/Teradata implementation, which predates the patent filing by many years. Wierd. It's a minefield of patents.... > I haven't got a working copy of DB2 in front of me to test. True, not all copies work :-) Best Regards, Simon Riggs