| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT (was Question: pg_class attributes and race conditions ?) |
| Date: | 2007-03-19 10:51:57 |
| Message-ID: | [email protected] |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> > We would only need the extra byte in HOT-updated tuples.
> Alternatively, we could use the bits we have free in infomask2. There's
> currently 5 bits free, using just 2 or 3 of those would get us quite
> far. Or just one, which would be the Tom's suggestion of only using HOT
> for tables with a single index.
> >
>
> We've already used three of those, two for tracking HEAP_ONLY
> and HOT_UPDATED tuples and one for tracking fragmented tuple.
HEAP_ONLY_TUPLE would go away in favor of the per-index bits. So we have
bits available for three indexes.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-03-19 11:00:21 | Re: modifying the tbale function |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-03-19 10:36:31 | Re: CREATE INDEX and HOT (was Question:pg_classattributes and race conditions ?) |