Message-ID: <45E7D760.3040206@mithral.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 23:50:56 -0800
From: Adam L Beberg <beberg@mithral.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Array indexes, GIN?
References: <45E7A108.9010802@mithral.com>
	<200703012147.38414.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0703020942310.400@sn.sai.msu.ru>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703020942310.400@sn.sai.msu.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Oleg Bartunov wrote on 3/1/2007 10:45 PM:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Josh Berkus wrote:
> 
>> Adam,
>>
>>> On the surface, looks like a job for GIN, but GIN seems undocumented,
>>> specifically mentions it doesn't support the deletes we'll have many of
>>> since it's designed for word searching apparently, the performance
>>> implications are undocumented. I searched, I read, and even IRC'd, and
>>> it seems like GIN is just not used much.
>>
>> It's new (as of 8.2).  And the authors, Oleg and Teodor, are notorious 
>> for
>> skimpy documetentation.
> 
> We're getting better, we have 72 pages written about new FTS :)

I'm guessing FTS is not quite done since you matched 'FTS' to 'GIN' ;)

> GIN already has support for one dimensional arrays and intarray, 
> particularly, too has support of GiN.

Great, so can GIN handle my situation? I'm a little unsure what to make 
of "Note: There is no delete operation for ET." in particular since I'm 
dealing with large numbers.

-- 
Adam L. Beberg
http://www.mithral.com/~beberg/