Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoagVZPF2ZXaK6XByg8MH3Y4dbzBF0d4e05arSahYF_9dA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> As I commented to Robert, the page-at-a-time behavior of pageinspect >>> is not an API detail we'd want to copy for this. I envision something >>> like >>> >>> select hdr.*, foo.* >>> from tuple_header_details('foo'::regclass) as hdr >>> left join foo on hdr.ctid = foo.ctid; >>> >>> On a large table you might want a version that restricts its scan >>> to pages M through N, but that's just optimization. More useful >>> would be to improve the planner's intelligence about joins on ctid ... > >> /me blinks. > >> Surely you're not serious. That's going to scan the whole darn table >> even if we only want the details for one row. > > And? The complaint about the other function was that it was inefficient > when getting the details for a whole table, so I don't think you can > complain about an approach that handles that case well. Use the other > function if you just want info for one row (that you can see). Well, that's fair enough. I don't mind having two functions. Should the whole-table function also include invisible tuples? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: