Hi Heikki, Gavin and I are trying to merge our changes together this week. We will post a new patch by the end of this week. This patch will include some style fixes, bug fixes, and the stream bitmap implementation.
I will look into the problems you have mentioned in this email. Yes, vacuum currently does a reindex now. Gavin and I just talked about this yesterday. We are looking into ways to improve this. One way is not to do reindex for each vacuum. We maintain a list of updated tids along with the bitmap index. Only when this list goes to a certain point, vacuum will re-build the index. Thanks, Jie On 9/12/06 2:43 AM, "Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > What's the status of the bitmap index patch? Have you worked on it since > the last posted patch > (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-08/msg00003.php)? > > I've started to review it, to get it into CVS early in the 8.3 cycle. I > just want to make sure that I'm working on the latest version. > > Beside the issues already discussed, I found two minor bugs: > * pg_am says that bitmap am supports unique indexes, while it doesn't. > Second, > * race condition in _bitmap_inserttuple if two backends try to insert > the same, new value. If they both find that there's no lov item for the > key, and try to create one, one backend will get a duplicate key error > on the lov index. > > Also, vacuum actually does a reindex, which seems awfully wasteful. That > needs to be looked at. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
