Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: A more general approach (Re: Data archiving/warehousing idea)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
Cc: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)alcove(dot)com(dot)au>, Chris Dunlop <chris(at)onthe(dot)net(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: A more general approach (Re: Data archiving/warehousing idea)
Date: 2007-02-01 17:31:47
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> writes:
> A more radical variation of the "restricted-use archive table" approach
> is storing all tuple visibility info in a separate file.
> At first it seems to just add overhead, but for lots (most ? ) usecases
> the separately stored visibility should be highly compressible, so for
> example for bulk-loaded tables you could end up with one bit per page
> saying that all tuples on this page are visible.

The more you compress, the slower and more complicated it will be to
access the information.  I'd put my money on this being a net loss in
the majority of scenarios.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-02-01 18:02:37
Subject: Re: max_locks_per_transactions ...
Previous:From: Stefan KaltenbrunnerDate: 2007-02-01 17:25:50
Subject: Re: Why is ecpg segfaulting on buildfarm member "clownfish"?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group