Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables

From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Date: 2010-02-25 11:02:18
Message-ID: 9362e74e1002250302r51ba91a7q5aa8c1bf14c6a6d8@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Yes. When a bit is cleared, that's OK, because a cleared bit just means
> "you need to check visibility in the heap tuple". When a bit is set,
> however, it's important that it doesn't hit the disk before the
> corresponding heap page update. That's why visibilitymap_set() sets the
> LSN on the page.
>
> OK. Say a session doing the update, which is the fist update on the page,
resets the PD_ALL_VISIBLE and just before updating the visibility map
crashes. The subsequent inserts/updates/deletes, will see the PD_ALL_VISIBLE
flag cleared and never care to update the visibility map, but actually it
would have created tuples in index and table. So won't this return wrong
results?

Again it is not clear from your documentation, how you have handled this
situation?

Thanks,
Gokul.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-02-25 11:38:55 Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Previous Message Richard Huxton 2010-02-25 11:01:20 plperl.on_init - bug or just me?