From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Planned simplification of catalog index updates |
Date: | 2002-08-03 03:26:18 |
Message-ID: | 339.1028345178@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> writes:
>> Then the typical call would reduce to
>>
>> CatalogUpdateIndexes(Relation, HeapTuple);
> This would be great. Anyway to take it one step further and make it
> transparent? Hide it in heap_insert / update?
No, that would be quite inappropriate. The control paths that we're
talking about here insert or update only one tuple per transaction.
We do *not* want to do (a) open all indexes, (b) process one tuple,
(c) close all indexes in the performance-critical paths where many
tuples are processed per transaction. (Even in the paths that use
CatalogOpenIndexes, you wouldn't reduce it to a single call in
the routines that insert multiple tuples per call.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-03 04:05:40 | Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks |
Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-08-03 02:52:52 | char/varchar truncation |