On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 9:58 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 4:27 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> That makes sense, but this means there is a chance that the searches
>> could lead to different buffers in case of uniqueness checks (the
>> search with key-ctid could lead to a different buffer than the search
>> with just key). I am not clear do we have requirement for doing this
>> uniqueness check for key-ctid search API, because as I understand you
>> want to do it mainly for vacuum and WARM tuples. Vacuum won't add new
>> tuples, so is this required for WARM tuples?
>
> Well, I'm not realy sure what exactly would need to be done when doing
> the WARM conditional insert in the case of unique indexes, and that's
> a strong motivation to not add the interface for inserts just yet.
> Vacuum will only need to delete, and in the case of deletes the
> operation would be quite straight forward.
>
Right. I think if you initially modify the interface only for deletes
that will reduce the complexity of patch as well. We can later
enhance it to handle WARM tuple case.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
