From: | jagan <jaganrvce(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: WAL, xl_heap_insert and tuple oid mystry |
Date: | 2011-04-12 16:42:09 |
Message-ID: | 790093.18811.qm@web32107.mail.mud.yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
>> Where is the OID of tuple stored in a WAL record of a
>> tuple? If not with xl_heap_header, where is it stored? Is it
>> stored at all?
> It's stored in the "tuple data" portion.
Is the OID also recorded with xl_heap_delete record as well or just the xl_heaptid? From my reading of the code it is not recorded.
In general, why is OID of a tuple relegated as just another tuple data, when it can replace xl_heaptid as a much more stable tuple identifier. I understand that by recording tuples in terms of xl_heaptid (i.e., page/offset) means that the db can recover quickly but isn't there some value to storing a much "higher level" information in the WAL logs? For example, tuple manipulations, if recorded in terms of manipulation on tuple oids, can support applications such as these:
http://blogs.enterprisedb.com/2011/03/03/more-musings-on-logical-replication/
Just a thought.
Thanks,
Jagan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-04-12 16:49:33 | Re: WAL, xl_heap_insert and tuple oid mystry |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-04-12 14:58:25 | Re: Back branch update releases this week; beta postponed |