On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 05:06:09PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > This result is very impressive. We'll need to revisit what the right > trade-off is for the compression scheme, which Heikki had some > thoughts on when we left off 3 years ago, but that should be a lot > easier now. I am very encouraged by the fact that this relatively > simple approach already works quite nicely. It's also great to see > that bulk insertions with lots of compression are very clearly faster > with this latest revision of your patch, unlike earlier versions from > 2016 that made those cases slower (though I haven't tested indexes > that don't really use compression). I think that this is because you > now do the compression lazily, at the point where it looks like we may > need to split the page. Previous versions of the patch had to perform > compression eagerly, just like GIN, which is not really appropriate > for nbtree.
I am also encouraged and am happy we can finally move this duplicate optimization forward. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
