Horton

Re: Bitmap Indexes patch

Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: Gianni Ciolli <gianni.ciolli@2ndquadrant.it>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele.bartolini@2ndquadrant.it>
Date: 2008-11-04T11:17:15Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:

> On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 23:28 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 17:37 -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
>> 
>> > There are a lot of comments in the code which imply that vacuuming is
>> > not implemented but in fact from what I can see it is -- sort of. It
>> > does rewrite the bitmap in bmbulkdelete but it doesn't have to rebuild
>> > the index from scratch.  Are the comments out of date or am i
>> > misunderstanding them or the code? How complete is the vacuum
>> > implementation?
>> 
>> As I understood it, complete. 
>
> Looking at the code, it looks like my understanding was complete-ly
> wrong and your comments seem accurate.

What I would appreciate is a README explaining how vacuum and vacuum full
work.

-- 
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!