| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Nikhil S" <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: HOT for PostgreSQL 8.3 |
| Date: | 2007-02-16 15:56:16 |
| Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA57901C13BEA@m0143.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > As described, you've made
> > that problem worse because you're trying to say we don't know which
of
> > the chain entries is pointed at.
>
> There should be a flag, say HOT_CHAIN_ENTRY for the tuple the
it's called HEAP_UPDATE_ROOT
> index(es) point at. And this should be the preferred CTID for
> inserting new versions once the old one is dead.
This is not possible, see my reply to Bruce (maybe unless the whole hot
chain is dead).
(because that would need a back pointer, so readers arriving at the root
find the visible tuple)
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2007-02-16 16:11:21 | Re: patch adding new regexp functions |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-02-16 15:49:24 | Re: HOT for PostgreSQL 8.3 |