| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Karl Schnaitter" <karlsch(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers list" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
| Date: | 2010-02-24 17:33:07 |
| Message-ID: | 4B850E74020000250002F5F0@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> scan through the leaf pages.
>
> That doesn't work because when you split an index page any
> sequential scan in progress will either see the same tuples twice
> or will miss some tuples depending on where the new page is
> allocated. Vacuum has a clever trick for solving this but it
> doesn't work for arbitrarily many concurrent scans.
It sounds like you're asserting that Index Scan nodes are inherently
unreliable, so I must be misunderstanding you.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-02-24 17:35:57 | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-02-24 17:30:03 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Move documentation of all recovery.conf option to a new chapter. |