Re: index prefetching
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: index prefetching |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WzkCE0BhjUVQd1xRsPkDM+f_tstYLGPqNoUbj2oYn7YFXQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: index prefetching (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: index prefetching
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 4:46 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > Maybe I'm missing something, but the current interface doesn't seem to work > for AMs that don't have a 1:1 mapping between the block number portion of the > tid and the actual block number? I'm not completely sure what you mean here. Even within nbtree, posting list tuples work by setting the INDEX_ALT_TID_MASK index tuple header bit. That makes nbtree interpret IndexTupleData.t_tid as metadata (in this case describing a posting list). Obviously, that isn't "a standard IndexTuple", but that won't break either patch/approach. The index AM is obligated to pass back heap TIDs, without any external code needing to understand these sorts of implementation details. The on-disk representation of TIDs remains an implementation detail known only to index AMs. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: