From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Indirect indexes
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:03:35 -0500
Message-ID: <20170106020335.GA3063@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161230223530.gvu4azrsfqzr5eus@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20161229072807.b2p4ld55xmgwshhj@alvherre.pgsql>
<20161230223530.gvu4azrsfqzr5eus@alvherre.pgsql>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 07:35:30PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Attached is v4, which fixes a couple of relatively minor bugs. There
> are still things to tackle before this is committable, but coding review
> of the new executor node would be welcome.
>
> The big remaining item is still fitting the PK data in TIDs 6 bytes.
> I've been looking at reworking the btree code to allow for an arbitrary
> size; it doesn't look impossible although it's going to be rather
> invasive. Also, vacuuming: my answer continues to be that the killtuple
> interface should be good enough, but it's possible to vacuum the index
> separately from vacuuming the table anyway if you do a full scan and
> check the PK tuples for each indirect tuple.
>
> This patch implements killtuple: a scan that sees an indirect tuple not
> returning anything from the heap marks the tuple as LP_DEAD. Later,
> when the page is about to be split, those tuples are removed.
>
> I also have a note in the code about not inserting an indirect tuple
> when an identical one already exists. This is a correctness issue: we
> return duplicated heap rows in certain cases.
I still question the value of this patch as it requires user
configuration vs. more aggressive HOT/WARM updates.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: bruce@momjian.us, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
Subject: Re: Indirect indexes
In-Reply-To: <20170106020335.GA3063@momjian.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox