Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 407d949e1002251308n2fdf3e19j34b55d8d656add30@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables (Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007@gmail.com> wrote: > I think, somewhere things have been misunderstood. we only need 8 > bytes more per index entry. I thought Postgres has a 8 byte transaction id, > but it is only 4 bytes, so we only need to save the insertion and deletion > xids. So 8 bytes more per tuple. > Well in the heap we need 4 bytes: xmin 4 bytes: xmax 4 bytes: cid 6 bytes: ctid 6 bytes: various info bits including natts In indexes we currently get away with a reduced header which has few of the 6 bytes of info bits. However the only reason we can do is because we impose arbitrary limitations that work for indexes but wouldn't be reasonable for tables. Such as a lower maximum number of columns, inability to add new columns or drop columns later, etc. -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: