Re: HOT WIP Patch - version 2
| От | Pavan Deolasee |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: HOT WIP Patch - version 2 |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 2e78013d0702200701w7d08304fx2916b546703b7f2f@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: HOT WIP Patch - version 2 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: HOT WIP Patch - version 2
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/20/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
"Pavan Deolasee" <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> writes:
> ... Yes. The HOT-updated status of the root and all intermediate
> tuples is cleared and their respective ctid pointers are made
> point to themselves.
Doesn't that destroy the knowledge that they form a tuple chain?
While it might be that no one cares any longer, it would seem more
reasonable to leave 'em chained together.
I see your point, but as you mentioned do we really care ? The chain
needs to be broken so that the intermediate DEAD tuples can be
vacuumed. We can't vacuum them normally because they could
be a part of live HOT-update chain. Resetting the HOT-updated
status of the root tuple helps to mark the index entry LP_DELETE
once the entire HOT-update chain is dead.
Also, if we decide to reuse the heap-only tuples without even
vacuuming, breaking the chain is a better option since we then
guarantee no references to the heap-only DEAD tuples.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: