|From:||"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Subject:||Re: Frequent Update Project: Design Overview of HOTUpdates|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 13:21 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > 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...
|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|