Re: Improving replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM records

On 1/8/16 9:34 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 8 January 2016 at 13:36, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> I would agree except for the observation on toast indexes.  I think
>>> that's an important enough use case that perhaps we should have both.
>> The exclusion of toast indexes is something we can remove also, I have
>> recently discovered. When we access toast data we ignore MVCC, but we still
>> have the toast pointer and chunkid to use for rechecking our scan results.
>> So a later patch will add some rechecks.
> Ah, interesting, glad to hear.  I take it you're pushing your patch
> soon, then?

ISTM that this patch should be "returned with feedback" or "rejected" 
based on the thread.  I'm marking it "waiting for author" for the time 
being.

Thanks,

-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net