Re: [WIP] In-place upgrade
| От | Gregory Stark |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [WIP] In-place upgrade |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 87iqr1ab1p.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [WIP] In-place upgrade (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [WIP] In-place upgrade
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 09:41:52PM +0000, Gregory Stark wrote: >> "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> >> >> Problem is how to move tuple from page to another and keep indexes in sync. >> >> One solution is to perform some think like "update" operation on the tuple. >> >> But you need exclusive lock on the page and pin counter have to be zero. And >> >> question is where it is safe operation. >> > >> > But doesn't this problem go away if you do it in a transaction? You >> > set xmax on the old tuple, write the new tuple, and add index entries >> > just as you would for a normal update. >> >> But that doesn't actually solve the overflow problem on the old page... > > Sure it does. You move just enough tuples that you can convert the page > without an overflow. setting the xmax on a tuple doesn't "move" the tuple -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: