Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Date
Msg-id 20050122201049.GR67721@decibel.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
List pgsql-performance
From http://developer.postgresql.org/todo.php:

Maintain a map of recently-expired rows

This allows vacuum to reclaim free space without requiring a sequential
scan

On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 12:20:53PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Quick thought -- would it be to possible to implement a 'partial VACUUM'
> > per analogiam to partial indexes?
>
> No.
>
> But it gave me another idea. Perhaps equally infeasible, but I don't see why.
>
> What if there were a map of modified pages. So every time any tuple was marked
> deleted it could be marked in the map as modified. VACUUM would only have to
> look at these pages. And if it could mark as free every tuple that was marked
> as deleted then it could unmark the page.
>
> The only downside I see is that this could be a source of contention on
> multi-processor machines running lots of concurrent update/deletes.
>
> --
> greg
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>                http://archives.postgresql.org
>

--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant               decibel@decibel.org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Rod Taylor
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: inheritance performance