pgsql: Actually there's a better way to do this, which is to count

From: tgl(at)postgresql(dot)org (Tom Lane)
To: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: pgsql: Actually there's a better way to do this, which is to count
Date: 2006-02-12 00:18:17
Message-ID: 20060212001817.B920C9DCBC7@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

Log Message:
-----------
Actually there's a better way to do this, which is to count tuples
during the vacuumcleanup scan that we're going to do anyway. Should
save a few cycles (one calculation per page, not per tuple) as well
as not having to depend on assumptions about heap and index being
in step.
I think this could probably be made to work for GIST too, but that
code looks messy enough that I'm disinclined to try right now.

Modified Files:
--------------
pgsql/src/backend/access/nbtree:
nbtree.c (r1.139 -> r1.140)
(http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtree.c.diff?r1=1.139&r2=1.140)

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-02-12 00:29:10 Re: pgsql: Allow ALTER TABLE ...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-02-11 23:31:34 pgsql: Skip ambulkdelete scan if there's nothing to delete and the index