> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>I've been down several roads about how to handle data that has to change >>on a very frequent and rapid manner. >> >>Think about summary tables, WEB session tables, etc. As great as MVCC is >>for the vast majority of uses. The overhead of updates and deletes can >>kill a project that needs to constantly update tables. >> >> >> >> > > Are you saying that MVCC has *by design* a higher overhead for updates > and deletes? or are you referring to the gradual loss of performance as > a consequence of many dead tuples? > > I am guessing you mean the latter, but best to be sure :-) The best phrasing would be "the accumulating overhead of deletes and updates."
Yes. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
