Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Instability in TRUNCATE regression test
Date: 2006-06-28 17:18:29
Message-ID: 20060628171829.GG44573@pervasive.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 01:13:42PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> One thing I was toying with was to add an index to pg_constraint on,
> say, (confrelid, conrelid), and to replace the existing seqscans for FK
> constraints with scans using this index. The second-column ordering
> would guarantee everybody visits the entries in the same order. Not
> sure about overall performance implications ... in a small database,
> several indexscans might take more time than one seqscan.

In a small database, both operations are likely to be plenty fast for
TRUNCATE, though. Surely the performance impact of getting the requisite
locks would far exceed any catalog scan times, no? And if you were doing
TRUNCATE's very often, I'd expect the right pages to be in cache
anyway...
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message A.M. 2006-06-28 17:18:39 Re: Fixed length datatypes. WAS [GENERAL] UUID's as
Previous Message mark 2006-06-28 17:14:16 Re: Fixed length datatypes. WAS [GENERAL] UUID's as primary keys