Re: knngist - 0.8 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

>> http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/builtin_knngist_core-0.8.gz
>> http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/builtin_knngist_itself-0.8.gz
>> http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/builtin_knngist_proc-0.8.gz
>> http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/builtin_knngist_contrib_pg_trgm-0.8.gz
>> http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/builtin_knngist_contrib_btree_gist-0.8.gz

New version, synced with CVS HEAD
http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/builtin_knngist_itself-0.8.2.gz
http://www.sigaev.ru/misc/builtin_knngist_contrib_btree_gist-0.8.1.gz

> AFAICS, these patches include no documentation.  That's pretty much a
> fatal flaw for a feature of this magnitude.  At an absolute minimum,
> you need to update the system catalog documentation and the
> documentation on CREATE / ALTER OPERATOR CLASS.  There might be some
> other places that need to be touched, also.
Oleg promised to do that


> +               if (opform->oprresult == BOOLOID)
> +                       ereport(ERROR,
> +
> (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_OBJECT_DEFINITION),
> +                                        errmsg("index ordering
> operators must not return boolean")));
>
> My first thought was that this code was there to prevent people from
> doing the wrong thing by accident.  But I have a niggling feeling that
> you're actually relying on this for the correctness of the system.  I
> hope I'm wrong, because I don't think that would be a very good idea.

This play is around do we really want to have support of boolean-distance in 
GiST? I think no, because it's a strange idea to measure distance in true/false 
measurement units. I can't imagine such real-life distance definition and never 
heard about that.

Next, pg_amop_opr_fam_index requires uniqueness of operation in operation family 
and a lot of places in planner believes in that. Suppose, changing that requires 
a lot of work which has the single aim to support boolean distance in ORDER BY 
clause.


> The GIST code code use more comments; and perhaps the names of some of
> the functions and structures could be chosen to be more descriptive.
> I think that what used to be called GISTSearchStack has apparently
> been replaced with DataPointer; it's not obvious to me that it's good
> to change the name, but if it is I don't think DataPointer is a good
GISTSearchStack is replaced by RBTree (GISTScanOpaqueData->stack), tree's nodes 
contain a StackElem struct which represents list of pointers at the same 
distance. Each pointer could be a pointer to the inner index's page or to the
heap's tuple and this struct is a DataPointer.

Note, list of DataPointer in StackElem struct is organized by non-obvious way: 
we keep pointer to the head of list and pointer to the middle of list. New 
pointer-to-heap is inserted in the beginning of list, pointers-to-index-page - 
in the middle. That's done because we would like to:
1) pop pointers-to-heap as fast as possible, before any pointers-to-index-page
2) pop pointers-to-index-page to deep page (which is closer to leaf pages)   first. That's good for KNN performance and
emulatesclassical first-depth   search in ordinary search.
 
> choice.  gistindex_keytest has been replaced (sort of) by> processIndexTuple, which again seems more generic than
whatit> replaced.
 
Renamed, comments are improved

> Minor nit: the word "shoould" is mis-spelled.
fixed

BTW, now consistentFn is able to "manage" tree traversal - even for for ordinary 
search, GiST will choose child page with minimal distance.

-- 
Teodor Sigaev                                   E-mail: teodor@sigaev.ru
  WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/