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

Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables

From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Karl Schnaitter <karlsch(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Date: 2010-03-01 06:41:09
Message-ID: 9362e74e1002282241v37c95129qd1f235312546af4@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>
> The transaction information on tuples take 18 bytes plus several info
> bits. It's possible just storing a subset of that would be useful but
> it's unclear. And I think it would complicate the code if it had to
> sometimes fetch the heap tuple to get the rest and sometimes doesn't.
>

Visibility map had a similar proposal and it got accepted. Fine... I think,
if you guys are going to stress so hard, then there might be some issues,
which i am not foreseeing right now.


>
> I think you have to take up a simpler project as a first project. This
> is a major overhaul of transaction information and it depends on
> understanding how a lot of different areas work -- all of which are
> very complex tricky areas to understand.
>
> Yep.. i would start by just joining in someone's project to help them out.

Thanks,
Gokul.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Zdenek KotalaDate: 2010-03-01 08:26:48
Subject: Re: psql with GSS can crash
Previous:From: Gokulakannan SomasundaramDate: 2010-03-01 06:35:39
Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables

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