On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > IIRC, the README was written on the assumption that you'd already read > L&Y. If this patch is mostly about not assuming that, why not?
L&Y made the same mistake that the authors of most influential papers make - they never get around to telling the reader why they should bother to read it. The paper is over 30 years old, and we now know that it's very influential, and the reasons why. I think that both the nbtree README and L&Y would be a lot more approachable with a high level introduction (arguably L&Y attempt this, but the way they go about it seems impenetrable, mostly consisting of esoteric references to other papers). Surely making that code more approachable is a worthy goal. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
