| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: HOT - whats next ? |
| Date: | 2007-03-05 16:39:57 |
| Message-ID: | 19429.1173112797@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> The first function reads a single block from a file, returning the
> complete page as a bytea of length BLCKSZ.
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION bufpage_get_raw_page(text, int4)
> RETURNS bytea ...
Directly from the file? What if the version in buffers is completely
different? OTOH, if you try to pull from shared buffers then you won't
be able to deal with corrupted pages, so I think you are claiming that
the function can serve purposes that it can't really fulfill
simultaneously.
As for putting it in core, we already had that discussion w.r.t. the
adminpack functions, and you have not provided any argument adequate
to override the concerns expressed about those.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-03-05 16:53:36 | Re: Bug: Buffer cache is not scan resistant |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-03-05 16:32:53 | Re: Latest plans for Utilities with HOT |