| From: | "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Andreas Joseph Krogh" <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes |
| Date: | 2007-10-14 16:20:48 |
| Message-ID: | 9362e74e0710140920p457179day17100083cd58e545@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On 10/14/07, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
> > So Indexes with snapshots will be degrading the performance only for
> deletes
> > and only those updates, which are updating the index tuple.
>
> Deletes never update indexes in Postgres. Increasing the size of the index
> would affect vacuum, inserts, and index accesses.
In the new proposal, deletes are going to update indexes. So its a
trade-off between selects and deletes, since selects may not need to goto
the table for checking visibility. You may go through this thread, to get
more details.
--
> Gregory Stark
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gokulakannan Somasundaram | 2007-10-14 16:30:20 | Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-14 15:41:31 | Back-patch support for python 2.5? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gokulakannan Somasundaram | 2007-10-14 16:30:20 | Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-10-14 15:46:01 | Re: Assertion failure with small block sizes |