RE: Berkeley DB... - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mikheev, Vadim
Subject RE: Berkeley DB...
Date
Msg-id 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A23018BF8@SECTORBASE1
Whole thread Raw
In response to Berkeley DB...  ("Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > Yes, that was one of my questions.  Why use recno at all?  
> > We already have heap access which is very fast. Why switch
> > to SDB which gives us a recno ordering of heap that doesn't
> > do us any real good, except to allow tuple update without
> > changing indexes.
> 
> But if we'll use our heap AM, then we'll have to implement redo/undo
> for it... no sence to switch to SDB for btree/hash WAL support -:)

Also, I think that our native index logging will require less space
in log, because of we can do not write *key values* to log!
Index tuple insertion will be logged as "index tuple pointing to
heap TID was added to page BLKNO at position ITEMID".
The same for index page split...

Vadim


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Berkeley DB...
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Last call for comments: fmgr rewrite [LONG]