Re: Fwd: Clarification about HOT - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: Fwd: Clarification about HOT
Date
Msg-id 472EEA33.7030502@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Fwd: Clarification about HOT  ("Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Fwd: Clarification about HOT  ("Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote:
> Thanks for all the inputs. My question would be if we decide to update the
> top of the HOT chain in the Index itself. Right now we are carrying a list
> of tuple-ids to be vacuumed, when we vacuum the index. Say we carry another
> list (or through some better mechanism), which would carry the corresponding
> live HOT tuple to be pointed. In other words we would try to make the index
> point to the top of the HOT chain during Vacuum.

Yeah, we could do that. It was discussed in Spring, along with many 
other alternatives. Search the archives for "pointer swinging".

Basically, we decided we can live without it for now. It would've 
required quite a bit of changes, for not that much gain. We might still 
want it in the future if there's demand for it. If you really need to 
recover those 4 bytes per HOT chain, you can use VACUUM FULL, though it 
does take an exclusive lock on the table.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Visibility map thoughts
Next
From: "Gokulakannan Somasundaram"
Date:
Subject: Re: Fwd: Clarification about HOT