Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> In addition to/instead of abstracting cmin/cmax to a phantom ID, what
> about allowing for two versions of the tuple header, one with cid info
> and one without? That would allow for cid info to be stripped out when
> pages were written to disk.
How exactly would that help? You can't just strip out cid info when
writing to disk, if you don't want to lose the information.
And it's certainly a lot more complicated than the phantom id thing.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner||Date: 2006-09-28 16:16:09|
|Subject: Re: -HEAD planner issue wrt hash_joins on dbt3 ?|
|Previous:||From: Jim C. Nasby||Date: 2006-09-28 16:08:36|
|Subject: Another idea for dealing with cmin/cmax|