| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Automatic free space map filling |
| Date: | 2006-03-02 19:15:58 |
| Message-ID: | 4714.1141326958@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
> Why do we not truncate the line pointer array ?
> Is it, that vacuum (not the "full" version) does not move
> rows to other pages or slots ? Of course vacuum full could do it,
> but I see your point.
We can't reassign tuple TIDs safely except in vacuum full. It's
possible that a plain vacuum could safely truncate off unused line
pointers at the end of the array, but in the absence of a forcing
function to make those pointers become unused, I'm not sure it'd help
much.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-03-02 19:16:23 | Re: [HACKERS] Online backup vs Continuous backup |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-03-02 19:10:53 | Re: [SQL] Interval subtracting |