Re: Re: Rethinking hint bits WAS: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Rethinking hint bits WAS: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4CE1790D.9070805@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: Rethinking hint bits WAS: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Rethinking hint bits WAS: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Greg, Tom, > We *already* have separate bitmap outside the table for transaction > commit bits. It's the clog. You didn't read my whole e-mail. I talk about the CLOG further down. > Josh is ignoring the proposal that is on the table and seems actually > workable, which is to consult the visibility map during index-only > scans. For mostly-static tables this would save trips to the heap for > very little extra I/O. The hard part is to make the VM reliable, but > that is not obviously harder than making separately-stored hint bits > reliable. No, I'm not. I'm pointing out that it doesn't unblock the other 4 features/improvements I mentioned, *all* of which would be unblocked by not storing the hint bits in the table, whatever means we use to do so.You, for your part, are consistently ignoring theseother issues. -- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://www.pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: