On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 8:28 PM Mark Dilger wrote:
> > On Sep 18, 2018, at 3:58 PM, Alexander Korotkov <
> a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:42 PM Andrey Borodin
> wrote:
> >>> 17 сент. 2018 г., в 2:03, Alexander Korotkov <
> a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> написал(
> On Sep 18, 2018, at 3:58 PM, Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:42 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
>>> 17 сент. 2018 г., в 2:03, Alexander Korotkov
>>> написал(а):
>>>
>>> Also, it appears to me that it's OK to be a single patch
>>
>> +1, ISTM that these 6 patches repr
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:42 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
> > 17 сент. 2018 г., в 2:03, Alexander Korotkov
> > написал(а):
> >
> > Also, it appears to me that it's OK to be a single patch
>
> +1, ISTM that these 6 patches represent atomic unit of work.
Thank you, pushed.
--
Alexander Korotkov
Hi!
> 17 сент. 2018 г., в 2:03, Alexander Korotkov
> написал(а):
>
> Also, it appears to me that it's OK to be a single patch
+1, ISTM that these 6 patches represent atomic unit of work.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 3:57 PM Alexander Korotkov <
a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> Generally patch looks close to committable shape for me. I'm going to
> revise code and documentation again, split it up, and then propose to
> commit.
>
I've revised this patch again. This revision include
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 12:41 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> Right, performance regression appears to be caused by queue memory
> context allocation. I've tried to apply the same approach that we've
> in GiST: allocate separate memory context for queue only at second
> rescan call. And it appear
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 12:30 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 12:17 PM Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
> > # Current patch (use list)
> > x run 1 run 2 run 3
> > 0.11206 1230 1231
> > 0.01 2862 2813 2802
> > 0.003 13915 13911 13900
>
> Sorry, I didn't explain what
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 12:17 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> # Current patch (use list)
> x run 1 run 2 run 3
> 0.11206 1230 1231
> 0.01 2862 2813 2802
> 0.003 13915 13911 13900
Sorry, I didn't explain what these tables means. There are times in
milliseconds for 3 runs of spgist_be
Hi!
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:50 PM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 8:39 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
> > I'm not sure in architectural point of view: supporting two ways (list and
> > heap) to store result seems may be a bit heavy, but OK. At least, it has
> > meaningful bene
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 8:39 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
> I'm not sure in architectural point of view: supporting two ways (list and
> heap) to store result seems may be a bit heavy, but OK. At least, it has
> meaningful benefits.
It seems that Nikita have reworked it that way after my suspect th
17 июля 2018 г., в 16:42, Nikita Glukhov написал(а):
>
> Fixed.
Patch works as advertised, adds documentation and tests. I didn't succeeded in
attempts to break it's functionality. I have no more notices about the code.
Maybe except this const looks unusual, but is correct
+extern BOX *box_copy
Attached 7th version of the patches:
* renamed recheck fields and variables
* fixed formatting of the one if-statement
On 15.07.2018 14:54, Andrey Borodin wrote:
14.07.2018, 1:31, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
Attached 6th version of the patches.
...
2. The patch leaves contribs intact. Do extens
Hi!
> 14 июля 2018 г., в 1:31, Nikita Glukhov написал(а):
>
> Attached 6th version of the patches.
> ...
>> 2. The patch leaves contribs intact. Do extensions with sp-gist opclasses
>> need to update it's behavior somehow to be used as-is? Or to support new
>> functionality?
>
> There are no S
Attached 6th version of the patches.
On 09.07.2018 20:47, Andrey Borodin wrote:
4 июля 2018 г., в 3:21, Nikita Glukhov написал(а):
Attached 5th version of the patches, where minor refactoring of distance
handling was done (see below).
I'm reviewing this patch. Currently I'm trying to underst
Hi!
> I'm reviewing this patch. Currently I'm trying to understand sp-gist scan
> deeeper, but as for now have some small notices.
I've passed through the code one more time. Here are few more questions:
1. Logic behind division of the patch into steps is described last time
2017-01-30, but IST
Hi!
> 4 июля 2018 г., в 3:21, Nikita Glukhov написал(а):
> Attached 5th version of the patches, where minor refactoring of distance
> handling was done (see below).
>
I'm reviewing this patch. Currently I'm trying to understand sp-gist scan
deeeper, but as for now have some small notices.
F
Attached 5th version of the patches, where minor refactoring of distance
handling was done (see below).
On 02.07.2018 19:06, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Hi!
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 5:37 PM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
On 06.03.2018 17:30, David Steele wrote:
I agree with Andres. Pushing this patch
Hi!
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 5:37 PM Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> On 06.03.2018 17:30, David Steele wrote:
>
> > I agree with Andres. Pushing this patch to the next CF.
>
> Attached 4th version of the patches rebased onto the current master.
> Nothing interesting has changed from the previous version.
On 06.03.2018 17:30, David Steele wrote:
I agree with Andres. Pushing this patch to the next CF.
Attached 4th version of the patches rebased onto the current master.
Nothing interesting has changed from the previous version.
--
Nikita Glukhov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Hi Nikita,
On 3/2/18 1:35 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2018-03-01 00:58:42 +0300, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
>> Attached 3rd version of kNN for SP-GiST.
>
> Given that this was submitted to the last v11 CF, after not being
> developed for a year, I think it's unfortunately too late for v11. As we
Hi,
On 2018-03-01 00:58:42 +0300, Nikita Glukhov wrote:
> Attached 3rd version of kNN for SP-GiST.
Given that this was submitted to the last v11 CF, after not being
developed for a year, I think it's unfortunately too late for v11. As we
should be concentrating on getting things into v11, I think
Attached 3rd version of kNN for SP-GiST.
On 09.03.2017 16:52, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Hi, Nikita!
I take a look to this patchset. My first notes are following.
* 0003-Extract-index_store_orderby_distances-v02.patch
Function index_store_orderby_distances doesn't look general enough for
i
22 matches
Mail list logo