On 1/8/16 9:34 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On 8 January 2016 at 13:36, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
I would agree except for the observation on toast indexes. I think
that's an important enough use case that perhaps we should have both.
The exclusion of toast indexes is something we can remove also, I have
recently discovered. When we access toast data we ignore MVCC, but we still
have the toast pointer and chunkid to use for rechecking our scan results.
So a later patch will add some rechecks.
Ah, interesting, glad to hear. I take it you're pushing your patch
soon, then?
ISTM that this patch should be "returned with feedback" or "rejected"
based on the thread. I'm marking it "waiting for author" for the time
being.
Thanks,
--
-David
da...@pgmasters.net
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
