Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables

From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Karl Schnaitter <karlsch(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Date: 2010-02-26 12:57:39
Message-ID: 9362e74e1002260457m1f73254dradcf6054b57d7e1e@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> It definitely affects current indexes. We can't completely avoid bad user
> functions. That is why it is important to put limits on how much damage they
> can do. That's the motivation for the idea I mentioned before, of
> double-checking visibility data in an IndexTuple before letting it survive a
> VACUUM.
>

No i don't say it would affect Vacuum, but i am suspecting that it would
affect Index based select. Since Vacuum uses a sequential scan of tuples, it
doesn't require the ordering operator, but any index based search would
require a ordering operator for binary search and for comparing with the
right most key.

Thanks,
Gokul.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2010-02-26 13:00:08 Re: pg_stop_backup does not complete
Previous Message Greg Stark 2010-02-26 12:54:07 Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables