| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Remove xmin and cmin from frozen tuples | 
| Date: | 2005-09-02 20:07:26 | 
| Message-ID: | 17532.1125691646@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Considering the cost/benefits, rather than doing some optimization for
> long-lived tuples, I would like to see us merge the existing
> xmin/xmax/cmin/cmax values back into three storage fields like we had in
> 7.4 and had to expand to a full four in 8.0 to support subtransactions.
There is another reason for trying to do that rather than the frozen-row
optimization, which is that to get it down to two visibility-related
fields, we'd have to find another representation for tuples that are
Datums in memory.  The current Datum representation overlays three int32
fields where the visibility fields are for a tuple on-disk.  This works
fine now, and would still work fine if we could revert to the 7.4
approach, but it doesn't play nicely with a scheme to remove 2 of the 4
fields.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-09-02 20:21:00 | Re: Remove xmin and cmin from frozen tuples | 
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-02 20:02:08 | Re: Remove xmin and cmin from frozen tuples |