Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD
Subject Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC
Date
Msg-id E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA579011F007F@m0143.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > head of the chain yet.  With an index scan, finding the head is
easy,
> > but for a sequential scan, it seems more difficult, and we don't
have
> > any free space in the tail of the chain to maintain a pointer to the
head.
>
> Thinking some more, there will need to be a bit to uniquely
> identify the head of a CITC.

I don't think so. It would probably be sufficient to impose an order on
the CITC.
e.g. the oldest tuple version in the CITC is the head.
(An idea just in case we can't spare a bit :-)

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: PFC
Date:
Subject: Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC, and compression
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2