Re: 9.3 Pre-proposal: Range Merge Join

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2012-04-16T21:20:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:

> That had occurred to me, but I was hesitant to only use temp indexes. It
> still doesn't really offer a good solution when both sides of the join
> are relatively large (because of random I/O). Also the build speed of
> the index would be more important than it is now.

The thing I like most about temp indexes is that they needn't be temporary.

I'd like to see something along the lines of demand-created optional
indexes, that we reclaim space/maintenance overhead on according to
some cache management scheme. More space you have, the more of the
important ones hang around. The rough same idea applies to
materialised views.

-- 
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services