| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Karl Schnaitter <karlsch(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
| Date: | 2010-02-24 17:23:55 |
| Message-ID: | 407d949e1002240923t552a9ab8pafd17000856726c9@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram
<gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Sequential scans can be done on IOTs, just scan through the leaf pages.
That doesn't work because when you split an index page any sequential
scan in progress will either see the same tuples twice or will miss
some tuples depending on where the new page is allocated. Vacuum has a
clever trick for solving this but it doesn't work for arbitrarily many
concurrent scans.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-02-24 17:30:03 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Move documentation of all recovery.conf option to a new chapter. |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-02-24 17:18:54 | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |