Vadim Mikheev wrote:
> Hi, All
>
> First, as I've already mentioned in answer to Tom about DROP TABLE, undo
> logic
> will not be implemented in 7.1 -:( Doable for tables but for indices we
> would need
> either in compensation records or in xmin/cmin in index tuples. So, we'll
> still live
> with dust from aborted xactions in our tables/indices.
>
Does it mean that there would still be inconsistency between
tables and their indexes ?
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
- [HACKERS] WAL status update Vadim Mikheev
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL status update Hiroshi Inoue
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL status update Vadim Mikheev
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL status update Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL status update The Hermit Hacker
- RE: [HACKERS] WAL status update Mikheev, Vadim
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL status update Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL status update Vadim Mikheev
- RE: [HACKERS] WAL status update Mikheev, Vadim
- RE: [HACKERS] WAL status update Mikheev, Vadim