From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: visibility maps and heap_prune |
Date: | 2009-07-21 05:08:35 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070907202208i7bdce7bapd2f4e58cfc65e682@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Alex Hunsaker<badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 06:56, Pavan Deolasee<pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Here is a patch which implements this. The PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag is set if all
>> tuples in the page are visible to all transactions and there are no DEAD
>> line pointers in the page. The second check is required so that VACUUM takes
>> up the page. We could slightly distinguish the two cases (one where the page
>> requires vacuuming only because of DEAD line pointers and the other where
>> the page-tuples do not require any visibility checks), but I thought its not
>> worth the complexity.
>
> Hi!
>
> I was round robin assigned to review this. So take my comments with
> the grain of salt (or novice HOT salt) they deserve.
Pavan, are you planning to respond to Alex's comments and/or update this patch?
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2009-07-21 05:23:54 | Re: pg_restore --clean vs. large object |
Previous Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2009-07-21 05:07:47 | Re: Duplicate key value error |