On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 11:00 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > >> Those who have been with the community from long ago might remember > > >> discussion about implementing a undo log. The big advantage of this is > > >> that it allows UPDATE to _replace_ rows and limits the amount of cleanup > > >> required for UPDATEs. > > >> > > >> I am hoping that with HOT we will no longer have any need to even > > >> consider undo. > > >> > > > > > > We were considering it? > > > > I don't ever remember us considering it seriously. > > > > > > > > I certainly wasn't. I've enough experience with Oracle and InnoDB to > > > see that an undo log is its own set of performane issues. No thanks. > > > > > > > It certainly does. > > We never actually considred undo
I did, but eventually ruled it out during the HOT design process. But then I considered a ton of other things and ruled them out also. Can't see a reason to bring it up again, so perhaps we should add it to the definitely don't want list. Don't *need* would be better. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
