From: | Satyanarayana Narlapuram <Satyanarayana(dot)Narlapuram(at)microsoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: zheap: a new storage format for PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2018-03-01 15:30:08 |
Message-ID: | MWHPR21MB08293C04711704C0B7271C8A91C60@MWHPR21MB0829.namprd21.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> Cons
>> -----------
>> 1. Deletes can be somewhat expensive.
>> 2. Transaction aborts will be expensive.
>> 3. Updates that update most of the indexed columns can be somewhat expensive.
Given transaction aborts are expensive, is there any impact on the crash recovery? Did you perform any tests on the recovery duration?
Thanks,
Satya
________________________________
From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2018 7:05:12 AM
To: PostgreSQL Hackers
Subject: Re: zheap: a new storage format for PostgreSQL
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 7:39 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Preliminary performance results
> -------------------------------------------
>
I have not used plain text mode in my previous email due to which
performance results might not be clear in some email clients, so
attaching it again in the form of pdf.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-03-01 15:31:46 | Re: CALL optional in PL/pgSQL |
Previous Message | Erik Rijkers | 2018-03-01 15:27:11 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |