pgsql@mohawksoft.com wrote:
>I've been down several roads about how to handle data that has to change
>on a very frequent and rapid manner.
>
>Think about summary tables, WEB session tables, etc. As great as MVCC is
>for the vast majority of uses. The overhead of updates and deletes can
>kill a project that needs to constantly update tables.
>
>
>
>
Are you saying that MVCC has *by design* a higher overhead for updates
and deletes? or are you referring to the gradual loss of performance as
a consequence of many dead tuples?
I am guessing you mean the latter, but best to be sure :-)
regards
Mark
