asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: index-only plans
Date Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:49:17 GMT
@Chen, @Till: Thanks. I will try.

Best,
Taewoo

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Chen Li <chenli@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am always a big fan of separating a big merge into multiple small
> changes.  It will be good to do this "partitioning."
>
> Chen
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangsaeu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Till for reviewing this giant patch set.
> >
> > At this moment, what I can try to do is removing all necessary test cases
> > and changes that are related to full-text search preparation (changing
> the
> > function name of "contains" to "string-contains") since I thought this
> > index-only plan branch could be merged first.
> >
> > I tried to separate logical LIMIT push-down to the index search and
> > index-only plan. But, it turns out that it was hard. Other than this, all
> > changes are related to index-only plan part (most of them are
> accessMethod
> > related.) In addition, Young-Seok already had one round.
> >
> >
> > Best,
> > Taewoo
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Till Westmann <tillw@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > we still have the big change on index-only plans outstanding. I think
> > that
> > > it would be good to have that feature. However, at it’s current size
> > (+45K
> > > lines, -15K lines) it is very (!) difficult to review. So I think that
> > one
> > > approach to get there would be to break it down into smaller more
> > > achievable
> > > steps.
> > > I’ve added a few comments to the review with thoughts I had to do that.
> > > What do you think?
> > > Is that a good approach? Is it feasible?
> > > Are there other ways?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your thoughts,
> > > Till
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message