Re: Select performance vs. mssql

From: Enrico Weigelt <weigelt(at)metux(dot)de>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, mark durrant <markd89(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Select performance vs. mssql
Date: 2005-07-08 14:00:24
Message-ID: 20050708140024.GB6368@nibiru.borg.metux.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

* Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> wrote:

<snip>

> This gets brought up a lot. The problem is that the index doesn't include
> information about whether the current transaction can see the referenced
> row. Putting this information in the index will add significant overhead
> to every update and the opinion of the developers is that this would be
> a net loss overall.

wouldn't it work well to make this feature optionally for each
index ? There could be some flag on the index (ie set at create
time) which tells postgres whether to store mvcc information.

cu
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service
phone: +49 36207 519931 www: http://www.metux.de/
fax: +49 36207 519932 email: contact(at)metux(dot)de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Realtime Forex/Stock Exchange trading powered by postgresSQL :))
http://www.fxignal.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2005-07-08 14:03:48 Re: Mount database on RAM disk?
Previous Message Enrico Weigelt 2005-07-08 13:46:39 Re: plain inserts and deletes very slow