Re: Indirect indexes
От | Claudio Freire |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Indirect indexes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGTBQpZz0axwuRoNFG+1Y1gBnR_EkYzNbJoxwoWtT-a5VJttuQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Indirect indexes (Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Indirect indexes
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> WARM can do WARM update 50% of time, indirect index can do HOT update >> 100% of time (provided the column is not changed), I don't see why we >> could not have both solutions. >> > > I think the reason why I restricted WARM to one update per chain, also > applies to indirect index. For example, if a indirect column value is > changed from 'a' to 'b' and back to 'a', there will be two pointers from 'a' > to the PK and AFAICS that would lead to the same duplicate scan issue. > > We have a design to convert WARM chains back to HOT and that will increase > the percentage of WARM updates much beyond 50%. I was waiting for feedback > on the basic patch before putting in more efforts, but it went unnoticed > last CF. With indirect indexes, since you don't need to insert a tid, you can just "insert on conflict do nothing" on the index.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: