Re: Search from newer tuples first, vs older tuples first?

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > It is not that hard to implement, just messy.  When the index returns a
> > heap row and the heap row is viewed for visibility, if _no_one_ can see
> > the row, the index can be marked as expired.  It could be a single bit
> > in the index tuple, and doesn't need to be flushed to disk, though the
> > index page has to be marked as dirty.  However, we are going to need to
> > flush a pre-change image to WAL so it may as well be handled as a normal
> > index page change.
> 
> This did actually get done while you were on vacation.  It does *not*
> need a WAL entry, on the same principle that setting XMIN_COMMITTED,
> XMAX_ABORTED, etc hint bits do not need WAL entries --- namely the
> bits can always get set again if they are lost in a crash.

Oh, thanks.  That is great news.  I am having trouble determining when a
thread ends so please be patient with me.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026