| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com> |
| Cc: | markir(at)slingshot(dot)co(dot)nz, pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info |
| Subject: | Re: Free space mapping (was Re: Multi-Versions and Vacuum) |
| Date: | 2002-08-28 04:01:43 |
| Message-ID: | 17393.1030507303@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> escribi:
>> Eventually we need code to collapse out free space in indexes.
> Maybe when some lower limit is reached in two consecutive pages they
> should be merged?
Yup. The tricky part is to do this without causing problems for
concurrent readers of the index.
The Lehman-Yao paper that is the basis of our existing code explains how
readers can operate concurrently with splits of index pages. It doesn't
address doing page merges concurrently with reader scans. There are
newer papers in the literature that explain how to do that ... but no
one's gotten round to trying to implement it for Postgres.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jleelim online | 2002-08-28 04:11:02 | How to improve responsiveness during VACUUM on Linux |
| Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-08-28 03:49:56 | Re: Screwy behavior with SUM and multiple joins to same |