Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables

From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Karl Schnaitter <karlsch(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Date: 2010-02-26 04:24:08
Message-ID: 9362e74e1002252024x16dbf68djc9ebd90ea7e92699@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> No, it's far from harmless. As soon as that heap TID gets filled with
> an unrelated tuple, you run the risk of indexscans alighting on and
> perhaps modifying the wrong tuple.
>
>
Tom,
In the Function based indexes on those functions, which we are
suspecting to be a volatile one Or in the datatypes, which we suspect to be
broken, can we have additional checks to ensure that to ensure that this
does not happen? I mean, do you think, that would solve the issue?

Thanks,
Gokul.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-02-26 04:25:46 Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans.
Previous Message Gokulakannan Somasundaram 2010-02-26 04:20:21 Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables