Hi!
On Aug 19, 2010, at 7:17 PM, Prafulla wrote:
> I would like to understand if any work is done on this project so
> far. From mailing list it seems Stewart has done some work.
I believe both Stewart and I have poked at it. There are two needs:
1) An engine that can go behind the current "heap" engine that is
documented/extendable/etc. There is a long laundry list for this.
2) A concurrent, transactional engine.
> Also I just saw BTree index support has been removed from memory engine.
> Is it because we are going to redesign the engine itself or there
> is no much demand for Btree? It looks like there is need for Btree index
> on memory engine in real-life scenarios. At lease people seem to be using
> it.
A couple of days ago when I was going over the btree I observed that if I ran
all of the tests through it that a number of crashes/bugs/etc showed up (and I
did the same with MySQL and found additional issues). The problem is that the
b-tree support is just not heavily tested. It should be a drop in replacement
for the hash indexes, but it is not. The hash code is pretty reliable though. I
don't really like having code in the tree that we know has issues. I would
agree that the range indexes are useful, but in their current state I don't
believe that they are that usable.
Does this help any?
Cheers,
-Brian
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
