On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 13:55 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> > > Earlier we were talking about not inserting any HOT tuples until the index
> > > became valid. The goal of having an xid on the index was so we would know
> > > when
> > > we could start doing HOT updates again. That seems like a much lesser cost
> > > than not being able to use the index until all live transactions exit.
> >
> >
> > What I am proposing is to keep index unusable for existing transactions.
> > The index is available for all new transactions even if there are unfinished
> > existing transactions. Is that a big problem ? Well, I still need buy-in and
> > review from Tom and others on the design, but it seems workable to me.
>
> Yes, that seems totally acceptable to me. As I remember, the index is
> usable by the transaction that created it, and new transactions. Hard
> to see how someone would have a problem with that.
Agreed.
-- Simon Riggs EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
