Is this a better MVCC.

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От mlw
Тема Is this a better MVCC.
Дата
Msg-id 3CBC1552.4FF9789C@mohawksoft.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Firebird 1.0 released  ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Ответы Re: Is this a better MVCC.  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
I just had an interesting idea. It sounds too easy to beleve, but hear me out
and correct me if I'm wrong.

Currently, during update, PostgreSQL takes the existing record, modifyies it,
and adds it as a new row. The previous record has a pointer to the new version.
If the row is updated twice, the original row is hit first, followed by the
next version, then the last version. Do I understand this correctly?

Now, what if we did it another way, copy the old version of the row into the
new row and update the tuple in place? (Space permitting, of course.) That way,
performance does not degrade over time, also Vacuum should be easier and less
combersome because it simply lops off the end of the list, and mark tuples
which are not in any transaction path.

Is this a lot of work, is it inherently wrong?


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Mario Weilguni
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Improved vacuumlo
Следующее
От: "Marc G. Fournier"
Дата:
Сообщение: Testers needed ...