From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
Date: | 2010-02-22 06:51:57 |
Message-ID: | 4B82298D.6020002@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote:
> Hi,
> As you all know, Index Organized tables are a way by which we can
> automatically cluster the data based on the primary key. While i was
> thinking about an implementation for postgres, it looks like an impossible
> with the current ideologies. In an IOT, if a record gets updated, we need to
> mark the old row as deleted immediately, as we do with any other table. But
> since Postgres supports user defined data types and if they happen to be a
> broken data type, then we have an unstable IOT.(as there is no guarantee, we
> might hit the same record)
> This was the reason for which, the proposal on creating indexes with
> snapshot was rejected.
> May i get a little clarification on this issue? Will we be supporting
> the IOT feature in postgres in future?
What seems like the best path to achieve the kind of performance
benefits that IOTs offer is allowing index-only-scans using the
visibility map. I worked on that last summer, but unfortunately didn't
have the time to finish anything.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2010-02-22 07:59:36 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Oops, don't forget to rewind the directory before scanning it to |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-02-22 04:47:03 | Re: Streaming replication on win32, still broken |