| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Date: | 2006-06-24 12:43:13 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.OSF.4.61.0606241536290.44498@kosh.hut.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Mark Woodward wrote:
> I'm probably mistaken, but aren't there already forward references in
> tuples to later versions? If so, I'm only sugesting reversing the order
> and referencing the latest version.
I thought I understood your idea, but now you lost me again. I thought
what you want is that the older heap tuple has a pointer to the
newer one. Which it already has, it's called t_ctid.
Can you try to explain more carefully how the whole thing would work?
What would an index tuple point to? What pointers would a heap tuple
have? What would an index scan do to find the row version it's interested
in? What exactly would an update do?
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2006-06-24 13:13:28 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-06-24 12:36:05 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |