Re: WAL Bypass for indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: WAL Bypass for indexes
Date
Msg-id 14242.1144078893@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL Bypass for indexes  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@skype.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hannu Krosing <hannu@skype.net> writes:
> Ühel kenal päeval, E, 2006-04-03 kell 09:55, kirjutas Tom Lane:
>> (2) Some of the index code is itself deliberately nondeterministic.
>> I'm thinking in particular of the move-right-or-not choice in
>> _bt_insertonpg() when there are many equal keys, but randomization is
>> in general a useful algorithmic technique that we'd have to forswear.

> Why can't we just order "many equal keys" by ctid ?

Why is that better?  The bit of code mentioned above certainly isn't
going to benefit --- it will lose the opportunity to try to avoid a page
split.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL Bypass for indexes
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: semaphore usage "port based"?