| From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>, Ian Harding <iharding(at)pakrat(dot)com>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)cupid(dot)suninternet(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | RE: Re: Loading optimization |
| Date: | 2001-01-12 00:42:17 |
| Message-ID: | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D3268@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> This is OK for table files, unless someone's broken the code that will
> auto-initialize a zero page when it comes across one.
Hmmm, I don't see anything like auto-initialization in code -:(
Where did you put these changes?
> I had a note to myself saying that zeroed pages in indexes may not be
> OK, but I'm not sure if that's really a risk or not. btree, at least,
> never does any linear scans of an index file; it can only visit pages
> that are linked to by parent or sibling links. If we are careful that
> we init a btree page before we modify its sibling(s) and parent, we
> should be OK.
Should be covered by WALoging of newroot & split ops which only add
new pages.
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-12 00:43:27 | Re: postmaster won't run |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-12 00:28:42 | Re: Select * from ( Select etc..) |