From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: btree split logic is fragile in the presence of lar ge index items |
Date: | 2000-07-20 00:41:55 |
Message-ID: | 001701bff1e3$4dd15d60$2801007e@tpf.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikheev, Vadim
>
> > > > Do not add TID to key but store key anywhere in duplicate
> > > > chain and just read lefter child page while positioning index scan,
> > > > as we do right now for partial keys?
> > >
> > > > This will result in additional reads but I like it much more than
> > > > current "logic"...
> > >
> >
> > What about unique key insertions ?
>
> We'll have to find leftmost key in this case and do what we do now.
>
Currently the page contains the leftmost key is the target page of
insertion and is locked exclusively but it may be different in extra
TID implementation. There may be a very rare deadlock possibility.
Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2000-07-20 00:50:06 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] PRIMARY KEY & INHERITANCE (fwd) |
Previous Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-07-20 00:31:37 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] PRIMARY KEY & INHERITANCE (fwd) |