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

Re: Index Page Split logging

From: "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index Page Split logging
Date: 2008-01-02 11:16:11
Message-ID: 9362e74e0801020316x28e43c04s313b8a5f1f38302c@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>
>
> All indexes are done by user-defined functions, even b-trees. People can
> make their own b-tree indexes by defining an operator class. Note that
> "user-defined" is this case means anything called via the fmgr
> interface.


Again, i think i have one more wrong understanding. My understanding is,
We are discussing about user-defined functions because, they might be
actually be mutable functions, but the user might have classified as
immutable. This might cause some problems while replaying the log. In the
case of hash-indexes, if the hash-function is mutable, then the user has a
corrupted index.
Is there some other problem also, because of user-defined functions, that
will stall  recovery in the proposed idea?

In our standard b-tree(with no user-defined operator classes), there
shouldn't be any problem with replaying right?

Again shouldn't we say b-tree with user-defined op-classes as gist-btree? If
not what is the difference between both?

Again thanks for the explanation.

-- 
Thanks,
Gokul.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2008-01-02 12:54:03
Subject: Re: Index Page Split logging
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2008-01-02 10:40:02
Subject: Re: Index Page Split logging

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