Re: HOT updates & REDIRECT line pointers

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: HOT updates & REDIRECT line pointers
Date: 2012-03-22 13:35:30
Message-ID: CAHyXU0w5e9HP9Po2SitgGkk0RajSwsUmwL7S41VEU81+eaXgOg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> It strikes me that it likely wouldn't be any
>>> worse than, oh, say, flipping the default value of
>>> standard_conforming_strings,
>>
>> Really?  It's taking away functionality and not supplying any substitute
>> (or at least you did not propose any).  In fact, you didn't even suggest
>> exactly how you propose to not break joined UPDATE/DELETE.
>
> Oh, hmm, interesting.  I had been thinking that you were talking about
> a case where *user code* was relying on the semantics of the TID,
> which has always struck me as an implementation detail that users
> probably shouldn't get too attached to.

small aside: tid usage is the best method for kludging a delete/limit:
delete from del where ctid = any (array(select ctid from del limit
10)); (via http://postgres.cz/wiki/PostgreSQL_SQL_Tricks)

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2012-03-22 13:37:46 Re: Faster compression, again
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2012-03-22 13:31:57 Re: HOT updates & REDIRECT line pointers