1. 05 11月, 2019 1 次提交
  2. 22 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  3. 14 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  4. 13 8月, 2019 2 次提交
  5. 11 6月, 2019 1 次提交
  6. 22 3月, 2019 1 次提交
  7. 04 1月, 2019 2 次提交
  8. 22 11月, 2018 1 次提交
  9. 07 5月, 2018 1 次提交
  10. 14 2月, 2018 1 次提交
  11. 21 12月, 2017 1 次提交
  12. 19 12月, 2017 1 次提交
  13. 09 12月, 2017 1 次提交
  14. 07 12月, 2017 1 次提交
  15. 06 10月, 2017 1 次提交
    • F
      Load postings in batch on startup · cd2e26b7
      Fabian Reinartz 提交于
      This allows to insert IDs to postings out of order until
      a trigger function is called. This avoids the insertion sort we usually
      do which can be very costly since WAL entries are more out of order than
      regular adds.
      cd2e26b7
  16. 21 9月, 2017 1 次提交
    • F
      Ensure postings are always sorted · 6ee254e3
      Fabian Reinartz 提交于
      IDs for new series are handed out before the postings are locked. Thus
      series are not indexed in order of their IDs, which could result in only
      partially sorted postings list.
      Iterating over those silently skipped elements as the sort invariant was
      violated.
      6ee254e3
  17. 04 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  18. 12 5月, 2017 1 次提交
    • G
      Fix missing postings in Merge and Intersect (#77) · 2fa647f5
      Goutham Veeramachaneni 提交于
      * Test for a previous implematation of Intersect
      
      Before we were moving the postings list everytime we create a new
      chained `intersectPostings`. That was causing some postings to be
      skipped. This test fails on the older version.
      Signed-off-by: NGoutham Veeramachaneni <cs14btech11014@iith.ac.in>
      
      * Advance on Seek only when valid.
      
      Issue:
      Before in mergedPostings and others we advance everytime we `Seek`,
      which causes issues with `Intersect`.
      
      Take the case, where we have a mergedPostings = m merging, a: {10, 20, 30} and
      b: {15, 25, 35}. Everytime we `Seek`, we do a.Seek and b.Seek.
      
      Now if we Intersect m with {21, 22, 23, 30}, we would do Seek({21,22,23}) which
      would advance a and b beyond 30.
      
      Fix:
      Now we advance only when the seeking value is greater than the current
      value, as the definition specifies.
      
      Also, posting 0 will not be a valid posting and will be used to signal
      finished or un-initialized PostingsList.
      Signed-off-by: NGoutham Veeramachaneni <cs14btech11014@iith.ac.in>
      
      * Add test for Merge+Intersect edgecase.
      Signed-off-by: NGoutham Veeramachaneni <cs14btech11014@iith.ac.in>
      
      * Add comments to trivial tests.
      Signed-off-by: NGoutham Veeramachaneni <cs14btech11014@iith.ac.in>
      2fa647f5
  19. 25 4月, 2017 1 次提交
    • T
      Fix various postings implementations · d7ad9d26
      Tomasz Elendt 提交于
      * newIntersectPostings and newMergePostings should not advance passed
        postings automatically.
      * listPostings and bigEndianPostings should not panic with index out
        of range when At() is called before Next()/Seek().
      * Seek() call should advance listPostings/bigEndianPostings.
      d7ad9d26
  20. 22 4月, 2017 1 次提交
  21. 11 4月, 2017 1 次提交
  22. 09 4月, 2017 1 次提交
  23. 08 4月, 2017 1 次提交
  24. 27 3月, 2017 1 次提交
  25. 28 12月, 2016 2 次提交
  26. 27 12月, 2016 1 次提交