Re: Remove xmin and cmin from frozen tuples

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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: 2005-09-06 21:37:06
Message-ID: 20050906213706.GC27871@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 03:58:28PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 03:51:15PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > One possible solution is to create a phantom cid which represents a
> > cmin/cmax pair and is stored in local memory.
>
> If we're going to look at doing that I think it would also be good to
> consider including xmin and xmax as well.

If you do that, you'll never be able to delete or update the tuple.

> This might require persisting to disk, but for transactions that touch
> a number of tuples it could potentially be a big win (imagine being
> able to shrink all 4 fields down to a single int; a 45% space
> reduction).

Yeah, I've heard about compression algorithms that managed to fit
megabytes of data in 8 bytes and even less. They were very cool. No
one managed to write decompression algorithms however. Imagine a whole
data warehouse could be stored in a single disk block!! I imagine the
development of decompressors was boycotted by SAN vendors and the like.

--
Alvaro Herrera -- Valdivia, Chile Architect, www.EnterpriseDB.com
"Si un desconocido se acerca y te regala un CD de Ubuntu ...
Eso es ... Eau de Tux"

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mark 2005-09-06 21:50:45 Re: uuid type for postgres
Previous Message Greg Stark 2005-09-06 21:31:43 Re: uuid type for postgres