Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements
Date: 2008-12-03 06:57:52
Message-ID: 49362DF0.80404@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> If *that* is a use case we're interested in, the incoming tuples could
>> be accumulated in backend-private memory, and inserted into the index at
>> commit. That would be a lot simpler, with no need to worry about
>> concurrent inserts or vacuums.
>
> Doesn't work --- the index would yield wrong answers for later queries
> in the same transaction.

Queries would still need to check the backend-private list.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2008-12-03 07:05:43 Re: Hot Standby (commit fest version - v5)
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2008-12-03 06:55:51 Re: V2 of PITR performance improvement for 8.4

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2008-12-03 09:40:07 Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-12-03 01:06:05 Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements