Re: making update/delete of inheritance trees scale better

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: making update/delete of inheritance trees scale better
Date: 2021-03-23 17:19:18
Message-ID: 914899.1616519958@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I spent some time studying this patch this morning. As far as I can
> see, 0001 is a relatively faithful implementation of the design Tom
> proposed back in early 2019. I think it would be nice to either get
> this committed or else decide that we don't want it and what we're
> going to try to do instead,

Yeah, it's on my to-do list for this CF, but I expect it's going to
take some concentrated study and other things keep intruding :-(.

All of your comments/questions seem reasonable; thanks for taking
a look.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2021-03-23 17:24:45 Re: Replication slot stats misgivings
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2021-03-23 17:09:48 Re: proposal - psql - use pager for \watch command