Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft
Date
Msg-id 20160808162628.GB16416@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug  8, 2016 at 06:34:46PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> I think here expensive part would be recheck for the cases where the
> index value is changed to a different value (value which doesn't exist
> in WARM chain).   You anyway have to add the new entry (key,TID) in
> index, but each time traversing the WARM chain would be an additional
> effort.  For cases, where there are just two index entries and one
> them is being updated, it might regress as compare to what we do now.

Yes, I think the all-increment or all-decrement WARM chain is going to
be the right approach.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+                     Ancient Roman grave inscription +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Surprising behaviour of \set AUTOCOMMIT ON
Next
From: Vik Fearing
Date:
Subject: Re: No longer possible to query catalogs for index capabilities?