On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 08:31:45PM +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> I see your point, but as you mentioned do we really care ? The chain
> needs to be broken so that the intermediate DEAD tuples can be
> vacuumed. We can't vacuum them normally because they could
> be a part of live HOT-update chain. Resetting the HOT-updated
> status of the root tuple helps to mark the index entry LP_DELETE
> once the entire HOT-update chain is dead.
> ...

For some reason this paragraph raised a query in my mind. Will we
be able to toggle this new "hot update" code at configure time, so
that we can measure what sort of effect this change has once it is
complete?

Even if only during the early testing cycles for the next release, I
think it would be useful.

Cheers,
mark

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]     
__________________________
.  .  _  ._  . .   .__    .  . ._. .__ .   . . .__  | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/    |_     |\/|  |  |_  |   |/  |_   | 
|  | | | | \ | \   |__ .  |  | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__  | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

  One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
                       and in the darkness bind them...

                           http://mark.mielke.cc/


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
       match

Reply via email to