Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 07:58:56PM -0400, Doug McNaught wrote:
>> Hard to say how it would work, but come up with a good design and
>> quality patch and it'll probably go in. :)
>
> Probably not. This has been discussed before; what's needed is that the
> visibility information is stored also in the index. This is hard and
> inefficient to do, because it requires updating the index at the same
> time that the heap is updated. Which is a bad proposition as soon as
> there is more than one index, and when there is a seqscan involved (i.e.
> no index), because it means a lot of extra I/O.
Yeah, hence the smiley.
-Doug
--
Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees. --T. J. Jackson, 1863