| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Florian Pflug" <fgp(dot)phlo(dot)org(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: HOT patch - version 15 |
| Date: | 2007-09-11 07:54:42 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0709110054g7e559b63vce062af19ca41e29@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On 9/11/07, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> We're only changing the offsetnumber part of it, which is 2 bytes. That
> shouldn't cross a hardware sector boundary on any reasonable hardware.
>
>
Not entirely true if we consider line pointer redirection, which involves
changing 4 bytes. You can argue that for quick pruning we don't do any
line pointer redirection though.
Also my worry about dealing with unreachable heap-only dead tuples
remain. We may need to do far more work to identify that they are not part
of
any reachable HOT chain and hence can be removed.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-09-11 09:30:28 | Re: Yet more tsearch refactoring |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-09-11 07:47:41 | Re: HOT patch - version 15 |