Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Date: 2005-01-22 20:10:49
Message-ID: 20050122201049.GR67721@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>From http://developer.postgresql.org/todo.php:

Maintain a map of recently-expired rows

This allows vacuum to reclaim free space without requiring a sequential
scan

On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 12:20:53PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
> > Quick thought -- would it be to possible to implement a 'partial VACUUM'
> > per analogiam to partial indexes?
>
> No.
>
> But it gave me another idea. Perhaps equally infeasible, but I don't see why.
>
> What if there were a map of modified pages. So every time any tuple was marked
> deleted it could be marked in the map as modified. VACUUM would only have to
> look at these pages. And if it could mark as free every tuple that was marked
> as deleted then it could unmark the page.
>
> The only downside I see is that this could be a source of contention on
> multi-processor machines running lots of concurrent update/deletes.
>
> --
> greg
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-01-22 20:22:22 Re: inheritance performance
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2005-01-22 19:00:40 Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering