Re: Index AM change proposals, redux

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Index AM change proposals, redux
Date: 2008-04-11 16:15:56
Message-ID: 47FF8EBC.30308@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Perhaps it would be better to initialize needRecheck to the opclass
> RECHECK flag value? If the consistent function does nothing, the
> behavior is the same as before, but it can flip the flag in either
> direction if it wants.

I remember that last spring, in the context of GIT, you were worried
about the performance implication of preparing to recheck rows when no
rechecks are needed. I didn't quite buy that back then, but this would
have the same issue.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-04-11 16:23:06 Re: Index AM change proposals, redux
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2008-04-11 16:14:50 Re: Commit fest queue