Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem

From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
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 03:24:20
Message-ID: 3B0C7EE4.6975D792@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> 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?
>

Yes.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2001-05-24 03:34:06 RE: ADD/DROP CONSTRAINT and inheritance
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-05-24 03:02:18 Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem