Re: Why do index access methods use LP_DELETE?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why do index access methods use LP_DELETE?
Date: 2005-08-12 02:14:53
Message-ID: 12230.1123812893@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Why do index access methods use LP_DELETE?

My recollection is that I deliberately used LP_DELETE for the
known-dead-tuple marker so that there couldn't be any confusion with
the use of LP_USED. AFAIR, LP_USED isn't actually used in indexes,
so we could do it differently if there were another possible use for
the flag bit ... have you got one in mind?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-08-12 03:09:37 ereport(ERROR) and files
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-08-12 02:11:42 Re: data on devel code perf dip