Talk:B*-tree
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | The contents of the B*-tree page were merged into B-tree on 2011-08-05 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Nobody defines what a B*-tree is! This is very unencyclopedic =] --99.250.67.100 (talk) 21:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Merger proposal
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Merge done. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 17:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
This seems like a really small article describing a few straightforward variants of the B-tree data structure. I think it would be better merged into the B-tree article and rewritten as a section on variants of the B-tree structure.
- I agree that the B*-tree is a special form of the B-tree and could be merged into the latter one. Sae1962 (talk) 07:52, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Incorrect citation and explanations
[edit]This page confuses the B*-tree used in the floorplan design and the variant of B-tree. The first citation by Chang et al. is actually for the very popular B*-tree in the floorplanning area. It is defined as an ordered binary tree to model a compacted placement of blocks (objects), which is totally different from the variant of B-tree.