[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: ordered indexing for integers
Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount writes:
I think every other release has had incompatible changes, and if we are
contemplating one for 2.4, we need to do it sooner rather than later.
Yes. And I'd like to see this.
If incompatibility worries people even as early as this in 2.4's life,
we could leave the old format as the default in 2.4, and provide a
slapd.conf-option to enable ordered indexing.
OK, I guess we can add a config option to switch formats.
Howard Chu writes:
Currently the Presence index uses a hardcoded 4 byte key of
0x00000001. I want to change it to a 2 byte key of 0x0000 instead, to
prevent it from colliding with the Integer key space.
What representation are you planning? My thoughts about it tend towards
DER-inspired formats, something like this:
I was thinking of a fixed word size. Anything with variable length will
require a custom B-tree sort function, and we really don't want to go there.
8-byte keys representing 64 bit integers would do. (In fact we could leave the
presence index unchanged in that case.) We'd have to use a negated 2's
complement representation, since the B-tree sorts keys as unsigned characters.
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/