From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: [HACKERS] TODO list updated |
Date: | 2000-01-13 03:14:54 |
Message-ID: | 000401bf5d74$5d071d00$2801007e@tpf.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
>
> TODO item comments:
>
> * Pull requested data directly from indexes, bypassing heap data
>
> I doubt this is ever going to happen --- to make it possible, we'd
> have to store tuple-commit status in index entries as well as in the
> tuples themselves. That would be a substantial space and speed penalty;
> is the potential gain really worth it?
>
I agree with Tom. We could omit rows using indexes but cound't
pull data from indexes without time qualification of heap tuples now.
> * -elog() flushes cache, try invalidating just entries from current xact,
> perhaps using invalidation cache
>
> I don't think this is done?
>
If I recognize correctly this item,this was fixed by my recent changes
for cache invalidation though I had changed it without knowing this item.
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-13 03:19:34 | Re: [HACKERS] TODO list updated |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-13 03:05:31 | Re: [HACKERS] libpq+MB/putenv(), getenv() clean up |