Re: Frequently updated tables

From: pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com
To: "Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Frequently updated tables
Date: 2004-06-08 23:16:45
Message-ID: 19034.24.91.171.78.1086736605.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
>
> pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com wrote:
>
>>I've been down several roads about how to handle data that has to change
>>on a very frequent and rapid manner.
>>
>>Think about summary tables, WEB session tables, etc. As great as MVCC is
>>for the vast majority of uses. The overhead of updates and deletes can
>>kill a project that needs to constantly update tables.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Are you saying that MVCC has *by design* a higher overhead for updates
> and deletes? or are you referring to the gradual loss of performance as
> a consequence of many dead tuples?
>
> I am guessing you mean the latter, but best to be sure :-)
The best phrasing would be "the accumulating overhead of deletes and
updates."

Yes.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2004-06-08 23:17:48 Re: cvs head : broken regression tests ?
Previous Message Mark Kirkwood 2004-06-08 22:15:40 Re: Frequently updated tables