On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 10:26:21AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > overhead seems badly overpriced for insert-only tables. These are not > fundamental truths of the universe, or even of PostgreSQL; they are > specific consequences of the representation we've chosen for heaps. > Many of them are things that we've grown into, rather than designed > with malice aforethought: for example, freezing is a consequence of > the after-the-fact desire to be able to support more than 4bn > transactions over the lifetime of the database. So it's way better > than what we had before, and yet, if we all sat down and designed a > new on-disk storage format for a new product today, I'm sure none of > us would pick one that expires after 2bn transactions.
One thing to remember is that our freeze level is 200M transactions because of clog lookups/size, not wraparound concerns. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
