| From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum row? |
| Date: | 2006-06-25 16:29:02 |
| Message-ID: | 36e682920606250929h4dffa3ahe5f3e04599cf7069@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/24/06, Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> wrote:
> I originally suggested a methodology for preserving MVCC and everyone is
> confusing it as update "in place," this isnot what I intended.
Actually, you should've presented your idea as performing MVCC the way
Firebird does... the idea is basically the same. Doing some research
never hurts... especially with this crowd.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor | jharris(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2006-06-25 17:02:05 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-06-25 16:27:10 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |