| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)master(dot)phlo(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design |
| Date: | 2007-03-23 12:51:28 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0703230551l6b84ae6et2d21a87071d92020@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/23/07, Florian G. Pflug <fgp(at)master(dot)phlo(dot)org> wrote:
>
>
> Why exactly can't a SERIALIZABLE transaction use the index it created
> itself? If you add a pointer to the root of all HOT update chains where
> either the HEAD is alive, or some tuple is visible to the transaction
> creating the index, shouldn't this be sufficient for using the index
> in the creating transaction?
Tuples in the HOT-chain may not share the same index keys with
respect to the new index being built (they share the same keys for
all existing indexes though). So we don't know which index key
to use while building the index.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-03-23 12:51:32 | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design |
| Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-03-23 12:49:42 | Re: tsearch_core for inclusion |