On 13 February 2013 16:48, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > On 13.02.2013 18:20, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> Heikki Linnakangas<hlinnakan...@vmware.com> writes: >>> >>> The basic idea of a fractal tree index is to attach a buffer to every >>> non-leaf page. On insertion, instead of descending all the way down to >>> the correct leaf page, the new tuple is put on the buffer at the root >>> page. When that buffer fills up, all the tuples in the buffer are >>> cascaded down to the buffers on the next level pages. And recursively, >>> whenever a buffer fills up at any level, it's flushed to the next level. >> >> >> [ scratches head... ] What's "fractal" about that? Or is that just a >> content-free marketing name for this technique? > > > I'd call it out as a marketing name. I guess it's fractal in the sense that > all levels of the tree can hold "leaf tuples" in the buffers; the structure > looks the same no matter how deep you zoom, like a fractal.. But "Buffered" > would be more appropriate IMO.
I hope for their sake there is more to it than that. It's hard to see how buffering can be patented. -- Simon Riggs 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
