Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tille, Andreas
Subject Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.33.0111201707430.9667-100000@wr-linux02.rki.ivbb.bund.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> So, while we do have plans to mark some index tuples so we _know_ they
> are expired, we don't know how to efficiently mark index tuples so we
> _know_ they are valid.
>
> This is what I believe you want, where we can scan the index without
> checking the heap at all.
An new index type (say READONLY INDEX or some reasonable name) which is
valid all the time between two vacuum processes would suffice for my
application.  It would fit the needs of people who do a daily database
update and vacuum after this.

Of course it´s your descision if this makes sense and fits PostgreSQL
philosophy, but I think it would speed up some kind of applications.

Kind regards
        Andreas.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Open items
Next
From: F Harvell
Date:
Subject: Re: bug or change in functionality in 7.2?