| From: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Date: | 2006-06-24 06:54:56 |
| Message-ID: | 449CE1C0.7020309@Yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/23/2006 3:10 PM, Mark Woodward wrote:
> This is NOT an "in-place" update. The whole MVCC strategy of keeping old
> versions around doesn't change. The only thing that does change is one
> level of indirection. Rather than keep references to all versions of all
> rows in indexes, keep only a reference to the first or "key" row of each
> row, and have the first version of a row form the head of a linked list to
> subsequent versions of each row. The list will be in decending order.
Where exactly do you intend to keep all those links (for a table with N
indexes)?
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2006-06-24 07:29:47 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Previous Message | Mark Woodward | 2006-06-24 02:57:53 | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |