Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)

From: "Tille, Andreas" <TilleA(at)rki(dot)de>
To:
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
Date: 2001-11-20 16:11:26
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.33.0111201707430.9667-100000@wr-linux02.rki.ivbb.bund.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> So, while we do have plans to mark some index tuples so we _know_ they
> are expired, we don't know how to efficiently mark index tuples so we
> _know_ they are valid.
>
> This is what I believe you want, where we can scan the index without
> checking the heap at all.
An new index type (say READONLY INDEX or some reasonable name) which is
valid all the time between two vacuum processes would suffice for my
application. It would fit the needs of people who do a daily database
update and vacuum after this.

Of course it´s your descision if this makes sense and fits PostgreSQL
philosophy, but I think it would speed up some kind of applications.

Kind regards

Andreas.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message F Harvell 2001-11-20 16:40:23 Re: [HACKERS] bug or change in functionality in 7.2?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-11-20 15:53:09 Open items