From: | Venkat Balaji <venkat(dot)balaji(at)verse(dot)in> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | PGSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: : Tracking Full Table Scans |
Date: | 2011-09-28 06:09:48 |
Message-ID: | CAFrxt0iPUm=jr=eL=sfsoU1gCZCv+myWC+igmAL8gVQHG0G=+g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Thanks Kevin !!
I will have a look at the source tree.
Regards
VB
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Kevin Grittner <
Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Venkat Balaji <venkat(dot)balaji(at)verse(dot)in> wrote:
>
> > I would like to know the difference between "n_tup_upd" and
> > "n_tup_hot_upd".
>
> A HOT update is used when none of the updated columns are used in an
> index and there is room for the new tuple (version of the row) on
> the same page as the old tuple. This is faster for a number of
> reasons, and cleanup of the old tuple is a little different.
>
> If you want the gory implementation details, take a look at this
> file in the source tree:
>
> src/backend/access/heap/README.HOT
>
> -Kevin
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Venkat Balaji | 2011-09-28 06:13:25 | Re: : Tracking Full Table Scans |
Previous Message | anthony.shipman | 2011-09-28 05:13:06 | Re: overzealous sorting? |