On 2012-12-04 10:04:03 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 12/4/12 9:34 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Alexander Korotkov > > <aekorot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Patch completely changes storage in posting lists and leaf pages of posting > >> trees. It uses varbyte encoding for BlockNumber and OffsetNumber. > >> BlockNumber are stored incremental in page. Additionally one bit of > >> OffsetNumber is reserved for additional information NULL flag. To be able > >> to > >> find position in leaf data page quickly patch introduces small index in the > >> end of page. > > > > This sounds like it means that this would break pg_upgrade, about > > which I'm not too keen. Ideally, we'd like to have a situation where > > new indexes have additional capabilities, but old indexes are still > > usable for things that they could do before. I am not sure whether > > that's a realistic goal. > > Is there a reason not to create this as a new type of index? "GIN2" or > whatever?
Aren't the obvious maintenance problems enough? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
