| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Pre-allocated free space for row updating (like PCTFREE) |
| Date: | 2005-08-23 06:52:07 |
| Message-ID: | 430AC797.7000507@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> It should be possible to see what the crossover point is in terms of
> benefit using dbt2 and tweaking the transactions that are run, something
> I can do if there's interest. But I agree with Satoshi; if there are
> people who will benefit from this option (which doesn't hurt those who
> choose not to use it), why not put it in?
ISTM that this patch could be beneficial for the 'web session table'
type workload (i.e. huge number of updates on relatively few rows), that
is (well - last time I tried anyway) a bit of a challenge to reign in.
There was a thread about this a while ago (late 2004), so in some sense
it is a 'real world' scenario:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-06/msg00282.php
regards
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2005-08-23 07:03:48 | Re: 8.1 release notes |
| Previous Message | Gavin Sherry | 2005-08-23 06:06:54 | Re: VACUUM/t_ctid bug (was Re: GiST concurrency commited) |