| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Костя Кузнецов <chapaev28(at)ya(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: GiST VACUUM |
| Date: | 2019-07-04 01:11:10 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wz=s25OKJOYB69ggY-2PWwzXYeR69x_MkxsDms288TUGrQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:15 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> I think we should fix this in a similar manner in B-tree, too, but that
> can be done separately. For B-tree, we need to worry about
> backwards-compatibility, but that seems simple enough; we just need to
> continue to understand old deleted pages, where the deletion XID is
> stored in the page opaque field.
What Postgres versions will the B-Tree fix end up targeting? Sounds
like you plan to backpatch all the way?
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2019-07-04 01:51:06 | Re: Cleaning up and speeding up string functions |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2019-07-04 01:07:46 | Re: Memory-Bounded Hash Aggregation |