Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BufferAccessStrategy for bulk insert

From: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Postgres Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BufferAccessStrategy for bulk insert
Date: 2008-10-27 00:37:44
Message-ID: 603c8f070810261737o6aea3d54h278060f641f988f9@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Seems sane to me.  I don't see the point of the HEAP_INSERT_BULK flag
> bit --- providing or not providing bistate would cover that, and if
> you have a bit as well then you have to define what the inconsistent
> combinations mean.  I concur with making all-zeroes be the typical
> state of the flag bits, too.

Thanks for the design review.  I had thought to make the inconsistent
combinations fail an assertion, but I'm just as happy to leave it out
altogether.

> FWIW, we generally declare bitmask flag variables as int, unless
> there's some really good reason to do otherwise.

OK, thanks for the tip.

...Robert

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-10-27 01:49:49
Subject: WIP patch: convert SQL-language functions to return tuplestores
Previous:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2008-10-27 00:24:17
Subject: Re: array_agg and array_accum (patch)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group