From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design |
Date: | 2007-03-28 18:12:19 |
Message-ID: | 2e78013d0703281112l5498c03ejfc6b0cb1b731214c@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/28/07, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Set it at the end, not the beginning.
At the end of what ? It does not help to set it at the end of CREATE
INDEX because the transaction may not commit immediately. In
the meantime, many new transactions may start with
transaction id > xcreate. All these transactions can see the old
tuple (which we did not index) and can also see the index once
CREATE INDEX commits.
If you are indexing a table that hasn't just been created by you, set
> the xcreate field on pg_index at the *end* of the build using
> ReadNewTransactionId(). Any xid less than that sees the index as
> invalid. If you created the table in this transaction (i.e.
> createSubId != 0) then set xcreate to creating xid.
Why do we need to handle the case where table is created in
the same transaction ? Neither the table nor the index is visible
until we commit. So thats a simple case.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-03-28 18:36:46 | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-03-28 18:11:09 | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT - revised design |