Re: Reducing the memory footprint of large sets of pending triggers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Reducing the memory footprint of large sets of pending triggers
Date
Msg-id 1224941777.15085.86.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Reducing the memory footprint of large sets of pending triggers  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 08:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> > A much better objective would be to remove duplicate trigger calls, so
> > there isn't any build up of trigger data in the first place. That would
> > apply only to immutable functions. RI checks certainly fall into that
> > category.
> 
> They're hardly "duplicates": each event is for a different tuple.

That's what makes it hard; we may find the same trigger parameter values
but on different tuples.

> For RI checks, once you get past a certain percentage of the table it'd
> be better to throw away all the per-tuple events and do a full-table
> verification a la RI_Initial_Check().  I've got no idea about a sane
> way to make that happen, though.

Me neither, yet.

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Impending back branch update releases
Next
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing the memory footprint of large sets of pending triggers