Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gokulakannan Somasundaram
Subject Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Date
Msg-id 9362e74e1002220301y22111c0fvf4a21fbaf2fcc7e8@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to A thought on Index Organized Tables  (Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Forgot to include the group...

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007@gmail.com> wrote:


These sound like the same point to me. I don't think we're concerned
with footprint -- only with how much of that footprint actually needs
to be scanned. So if we have a solution allowing the scan to only need
to look at the index then the extra footprint of the table doesn't
cost anything at run-time. And the visibility map is very small.


Yep.. They are one and the same...
Just wanted a clarification on the design goals going forward.

Thanks,
Gokul.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and pg_xlogfile_name()