pgsql: Actually there's a better way to do this, which is to count

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От tgl@postgresql.org (Tom Lane)
Тема pgsql: Actually there's a better way to do this, which is to count
Дата
Msg-id 20060212001817.B920C9DCBC7@postgresql.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Список pgsql-committers
Log Message:
-----------
Actually there's a better way to do this, which is to count tuples
during the vacuumcleanup scan that we're going to do anyway.  Should
save a few cycles (one calculation per page, not per tuple) as well
as not having to depend on assumptions about heap and index being
in step.
I think this could probably be made to work for GIST too, but that
code looks messy enough that I'm disinclined to try right now.

Modified Files:
--------------
    pgsql/src/backend/access/nbtree:
        nbtree.c (r1.139 -> r1.140)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtree.c.diff?r1=1.139&r2=1.140)

В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: tgl@postgresql.org (Tom Lane)
Дата:
Сообщение: pgsql: Skip ambulkdelete scan if there's nothing to delete and the index
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgsql: Allow ALTER TABLE ...