Re: Getting rid of cmin and cmax - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Getting rid of cmin and cmax
Date
Msg-id 200609191846.k8JIkST08256@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Getting rid of cmin and cmax  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > Frankly the whole phantom commandid thing sounds more complicated. You *still*
> > need a local state data structure that *still* has to spill to disk and now
> > it's much harder to characterize how large it will grow since it depends on
> > arbitrary combinations of cmin and cmax.
> 
> Yeah, but it requires only one entry when a command processes
> arbitrarily large numbers of tuples, so in practice it's not going to
> need to spill to disk.  What Heikki wants to do will require an entry in
> local memory for *each tuple* modified by a transaction.  That will ruin
> performance on a regular basis.

Agreed.  TODO has:
* Merge xmin/xmax/cmin/cmax back into three header fields  Before subtransactions, there used to be only three fields
neededto  store these four values. This was possible because only the current  transaction looks at the cmin/cmax
values.If the current transaction  created and expired the row the fields stored where xmin (same as  xmax), cmin,
cmax,and if the transaction was expiring a row from a  another transaction, the fields stored were xmin (cmin was not
needed),xmax, and cmax. Such a system worked because a transaction  could only see rows from another completed
transaction.However,  subtransactions can see rows from outer transactions, and once the  subtransaction completes, the
outertransaction continues, requiring  the storage of all four fields. With subtransactions, an outer  transaction can
createa row, a subtransaction expire it, and when the  subtransaction completes, the outer transaction still has to
have proper visibility of the row's cmin, for example, for cursors.  One possible solution is to create a phantom cid
whichrepresents a  cmin/cmax pair and is stored in local memory.  Another idea is to  store both cmin and cmax only in
localmemory.
 

I do see both the phantom idea and the local memory for all cmin/cmax
values.  I believe the phantom idea has the most merit.

--  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Getting rid of cmin and cmax
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Release notes