Re: the big picture for index-only scans

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Gokulakannan Somasundaram
Тема Re: the big picture for index-only scans
Дата
Msg-id CAHMh4-ZQGRQvFVDnUy7LWcTEsmLk61F+qtCOCLEvQNVXQCyz9g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: the big picture for index-only scans  (Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: the big picture for index-only scans  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers


Well, that would certainly be alarming if true, but I don't think it
is.  As far as I can see, the overhead of making the visibility map
crash-safe is just (1) a very small percentage increase in the work
being done by VACUUM and (2) a slight possibility of extra work done
by a foreground process if the visibility map bit changes at almost
exactly the same time the process was about to insert, update, or
delete a tuple.

Let's forget the overhead posed by vacuum. Can you please point me to the design which talks in detail of the second overhead?

Thanks.

If you are following the same design that Heikki put forward, then there is a problem with it in maintaining the bits in page and the bits in visibility map in sync, which we have already discussed. 

  

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Gokulakannan Somasundaram
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: the big picture for index-only scans
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Rethinking sinval callback hook API