Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC
Date
Msg-id 2001.1151000355@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
Responses Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC
List pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>> The Oracle design has got other drawbacks: if you need to access a row
>> version other than than the very latest, you need to go searching in the
>> rollback segments for it.  This is slow (no index help) 

> Just for the record, if i understood correctly -- this was all a bit black
> magicky -- Oracle found the data in the rollback segment by storing a pointer
> to it in the block header where the updated data is. Ie, it could jump
> straight to the right place.

Yeah, you should be able to find the older version easily enough, if you
arrived at the newer version and realized you needed to visit the older
version.  But this fails in scenarios where you are searching on a
column that's been updated --- the index entry for the newer version
will not lead you to visit it at all.  I've not seen any documentation
about what Oracle does with cases like that.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions
Next
From: "Diogo Biazus"
Date:
Subject: Re: xlog viewer proposal