Re: Mark/Restore and avoiding RandomAccess sorts

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Mark/Restore and avoiding RandomAccess sorts
Date: 2007-01-10 15:10:27
Message-ID: 7225.1168441827@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Merge Joins require us to potentially Mark and Restore positions in the
> tuples arriving from executor sub-nodes.

I came across an old note to myself suggesting that we handle this by
interposing a Materialize node, and then teaching Material that if it's
told EXEC_FLAG_MARK but not EXEC_FLAG_REWIND or EXEC_FLAG_BACKWARD, it
need keep data only as far back as the Mark position. So the structural
requirements are mostly in place already, it's just a matter of figuring
out a nice way to implement the "drop older parts of the tuplestore"
business.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zdenek Kotala 2007-01-10 15:20:09 Re: ECPG regression test failures on Solaris 10/x86_64 with
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2007-01-10 15:09:39 Re: [PATCHES] COPY with no WAL, in certain circumstances