| From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Zdenek Kotala" <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)sun(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: visibility maps |
| Date: | 2008-12-17 13:57:46 |
| Message-ID: | 2e78013d0812170557u67a5894aua27bb5476f02e9dd@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>
> I think what you are suggesting is that we should set the visibility map
> bit while dead line pointers (tombstones) still remain. If that's what
> you meant it's a bad idea.
No, I'm not suggesting that. I understand the problem there. I was
merely explaining how HOT-prune may some time (when there are no DEAD
line pointers created) help us set the visibility bit early.
OTOH I think we can still set PD_ALL_VISIBLE page header flag even
when there are DEAD line pointers.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-12-17 14:02:01 | Re: visibility maps |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-12-17 13:53:44 | Re: [ADMIN] shared_buffers and shmmax |