Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF03C65A481 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:59:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 75495-08 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:58:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.156]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F329365A483 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:58:59 -0300 (ADT) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 16so1728531fgg.1 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:58:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=WOj4ffjj7VXClZoXTA7wTNjncGYBqgTog7dPGyfJ6w0=; b=A4+tSsUVH4MZrqbPyoPTiWtPMMsEqK/wA+wspx8cFf5/9jU8icvyjJQMV1LYmHXM/G fFL2v0SzgxFwS/EAs9+KZK2DyBfHEwjb91fmI0YlFgTUbq6xnS/OmHqH9S9t8asfLtoC s0xHPVcn04+C57Bz6b0jBHi0PMm8GkYuUlYSA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=J2Q0N6Thg0ukP/p2QkOO8nLeAhDmfYEX7dthbgjglArlK1uBqn7R3Kdf93V0mIcJLu 1t1Iu4dIDHz0a0BiW5/MsoO7IUVbBtPMNr+ZT3zWHeiImXmyoLLFTo8gzXhLhFKA1kPw oQcovy594TFCXfzKltN8+36OLi/DNu0FH59e4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.173.206 with SMTP id g14mr996706hbf.67.1268704737407; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:58:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201002252342.o1PNgtG07127@momjian.us> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:58:57 -0400 Message-ID: <603c8f071003151858o4d73d856n3a2d6a1d9a7da03@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: GiST index performance From: Robert Haas To: Matthew Wakeling Cc: Bruce Momjian , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.599 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201003/159 X-Sequence-Number: 37984 On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Matthew Wakeling wrote: > On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> >> Was there every any conclusion on this issue? > > Not really. Comments inline: > >> Matthew Wakeling wrote: >>> >>> Revisiting the thread a month back or so, I'm still investigating >>> performance problems with GiST indexes in Postgres. >>> >>> Looking at http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items I'd >>> like to clarify the contrib/seg issue. Contrib/seg is vulnerable to >>> pathological behaviour which is fixed by my second patch, which can be >>> viewed as complete. Contrib/cube, being multi-dimensional, is not >>> affected >>> to any significant degree, so should not need alteration. > > This issue is addressed by my patch, which AFAIK noone has reviewed. > However, that patch was derived from a patch that I applied to bioseg, which > is itself a derivative of seg. This patch works very well indeed, and gave > an approximate 100 times speed improvement in the one test I ran. > > So you could say that the sister patch of the one I submitted is tried and > tested in production. We rely fairly heavily on the commitfest app to track which patches need review; perhaps it would be good to add it here. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/open I seem to recall thinking that this patch wasn't ready to apply for some reason, but I'm not sure why I thought that. ...Robert