Re: UNDO and in-place update - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: UNDO and in-place update
Date
Msg-id 20161125175311.GA30116@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: UNDO and in-place update  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: UNDO and in-place update  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:23:28PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I agree up to a point.  I think we need to design our own system as
> well as we can, not just copy what others have done.  For example, the
> design I sketched will work with all of PostgreSQL's existing index
> types.  You need to modify each AM in order to support in-place
> updates when a column indexed by that AM has been modified, and that's
> probably highly desirable, but it's not a hard requirement.

I feel you are going to get into the problem of finding the index entry
for the old row --- the same thing that is holding back more aggressive
WARM updates.

--  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: Corey Huinker
Date:
Subject: Re: make default TABLESPACE belong to target table.
Next
From: Paul Ramsey
Date:
Subject: User-defined Operator Pushdown and Collations