| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Gavin M(dot) Roy" <gmr(at)myyearbook(dot)com>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.3.0 Core with concurrent vacuum fulls |
| Date: | 2008-03-06 18:00:25 |
| Message-ID: | 18945.1204826425@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 9:29 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> [ thinks some more... ] I guess we could use a flag array dimensioned
>> MaxHeapTuplesPerPage to mark already-processed tuples, so that you
>> wouldn't need to search the existing arrays but just index into the flag
>> array with the tuple's offsetnumber.
> We can actually combine this and the page copying ideas. Instead of copying
> the entire page, we can just copy the line pointers array and work on the copy.
I think that just makes things more complex and fragile. I like
Heikki's idea, in part because it makes the normal path and the WAL
recovery path guaranteed to work alike. I'll attach my work-in-progress
patch for this --- it doesn't do anything about the invalidation
semantics problem but it does fix the critical-section-too-big problem.
regards, tom lane
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| heap_prune_refactor.patch.gz | application/octet-stream | 6.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-03-06 18:09:32 | Re: Intended behaviour of SET search_path with SQL functions? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-03-06 17:28:14 | Re: Psql command-line completion bug |