Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, "'Zeugswetter Andreas SB'" <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem
Date: 2001-05-24 03:02:18
Message-ID: 26782.990673338@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Unless we want to abandon MVCC (which I don't), I think an overwriting
>> smgr is impractical.

> Impractical ? Oracle does it.

Oracle has MVCC?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2001-05-24 03:24:20 Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-05-24 02:59:53 Re: ADD/DROP CONSTRAINT and inheritance