Re: FSM search modes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, decibel <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FSM search modes
Date: 2009-10-01 21:08:12
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> The elephant in the room here is that if the relation is a million
> pages of which 1-100,000 and 1,000,000 are in use, no amount of bias
> is going to help us truncate the relation unless every tuple on page
> 1,000,000 gets updated or deleted.

Well, there is no way to move a tuple across pages in a user-invisible,
non-blocking fashion, so our ability to do something automatic about the
above scenario is limited. The discussion at the moment is about ways
of reducing the probability of getting into that situation in the first
place. That doesn't preclude also providing some more-invasive tools
that people can use when they do get into that situation; but let's
not let I-want-a-magic-pony syndrome prevent us from doing anything
at all.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-10-01 21:09:33 Re: FSM search modes
Previous Message Bernd Helmle 2009-10-01 21:07:32 Re: TODO item: Allow more complex user/database default GUC settings