Re: Frequent Update Project: Design Overview of HOTUpdates

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Frequent Update Project: Design Overview of HOTUpdates
Date: 2006-11-09 22:44:57
Message-ID: 1163112297.3634.570.camel@silverbirch.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 13:21 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Simon,
>
> > If we perform an update that meets the HOT criteria then we put the
> > new version into the overflow relation; we describe this as a HOT
> > UPDATE. If we perform an update that does not meet the criteria, then we
> > carry on with the existing/old MVCC behaviour; we describe this as a
> > non-HOT UPDATE.
>
> Making the essential performance analysis question, "Am I HOT or Not?"

Very good. ;-)

Well, we had Overflow Update CHaining as an alternative name... :-)

The naming sounds silly, but we had a few alternate designs, so we
needed to be able to tell them apart sensibly. We've had TVR, SITC, UIP
and now HOT. Software research...

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-11-09 23:17:33 Re: Introducing an advanced Frequent Update Optimization
Previous Message Mark Dilger 2006-11-09 22:41:35 Re: plperl/plperlu interaction