Simon Riggs wrote: > On 8 January 2016 at 13:36, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > I would agree except for the observation on toast indexes. I think > > that's an important enough use case that perhaps we should have both. > > The exclusion of toast indexes is something we can remove also, I have > recently discovered. When we access toast data we ignore MVCC, but we still > have the toast pointer and chunkid to use for rechecking our scan results. > So a later patch will add some rechecks. Ah, interesting, glad to hear. I take it you're pushing your patch soon, then? -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
