Re: Single pass vacuum - take 1
От | Pavan Deolasee |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Single pass vacuum - take 1 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABOikdNjwpP-uT18cksCrcu7SXLa1p571UHnzJ0JdFdoiNWvbw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Single pass vacuum - take 1 (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
I think we are better off doing only equality comparisons and dodging
this problem altogether.
Fair enough.
Just-plain-dead line pointers would have lp_off = 0. Dead-vacuumed
line pointers would have lp_off != 0. The first vacuum would use
lp_off = 1, the next one lp_off = 2, etc.
Actually, come to think of it, we could fit a 30-bit counter into the
line pointer. There are 15 unused bits in lp_off and 15 unused bits
in lp_len.
Thats clever! I think we can go this path and completely avoid any special area or additional header fields.
If we use a counter that is large enough that we don't have to worry
about wrap-around, I guess that's OK, though it seems a little weird
to think about having different backends running with different ideas
about the correct counter value.
Thanks,
Pavan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: