On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:01 PM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> On 2/15/16 10:29 AM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: > > It's very pity but author is not able to continue work on this patch, >> and I would like to raise this flag. >> >> I'd like to add some comments about patches: >> >> traversalValue patch adds arbitrary value assoŃiated with branch in >> SP-GiST tree walk. Unlike to recostructedValue it could be just pointer, >> it havn't to be a regular pgsql type. Also, it could be used independly >> from reconstructedValue. This patch is used both following attached >> patches. >> >> range patch just switchs using reconstructedValue to traversalValue in >> range opclasses. reconstructedValue was used just because it was an >> acceptable workaround in case of range type. Range opclase stores a full >> value in leafs and doesn't need to use reconstructedValue to return >> tuple in index only scan. >> See http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5399.1343512...@sss.pgh.pa.us >> >> q4d patch implements index over boxes using SP-GiST. Basic idea was an >> observation, range opclass thinks about one-dimensional ranges as 2D >> points. >> Following this idea, we can think that 2D box (what is 2 points or 4 >> numbers) could represent a 4D point. We hoped that this approach will be >> much more effective than traditional R-Tree in case of many overlaps in >> box's collection. >> Performance results are coming shortly. >> > > It appears that the issues raised in this thread have been addressed but > the patch still has not gone though a real review. > > Anybody out there willing to take a crack at a review? All three patches > apply (with whitespace issues). > Emre Hasegeli will review the patch. > > Thanks, > -- > -David > da...@pgmasters.net >
