Re: the big picture for index-only scans

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: the big picture for index-only scans
Date: 2011-08-20 12:06:26
Message-ID: CA+TgmobrxPoCwZvj1JQAGzEVOYp8omh_jwYdiEZfy7NoLHH+nQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram
<gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> by your argument, if WALInserLock is held for 't' seconds, you should
> definitely be holding visibility map lock for more than time frame 't'.

Nope, that's not how it works. Perhaps you should read the code.
See, e.g., heap_update().

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-08-20 12:15:04 Re: the big picture for index-only scans
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-08-20 12:05:31 Re: the big picture for index-only scans