| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to |
| Date: | 2010-03-27 19:15:37 |
| Message-ID: | 407d949e1003271215y3d71286fhba0464ecdbd23987@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> It appears that in practice many of the index items point to heap items
> that are LP_DEAD. So for the purposes of accessing a heap tuple's xmin,
> then we're both right. To the current purpose the tuple has been
> removed, though you are also right: its stub remains.
If we're pruning an index entry to a heap tuple that has been HOT
pruned wouldn't the HOT pruning record have already conflicted with
any queries that could see it?
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-03-27 19:36:47 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-03-27 10:10:42 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-03-27 19:30:51 | Re: Proposal: access control jails (and introduction as aspiring GSoC student) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-03-27 19:06:53 | Re: join removal |