Tom Lane wrote: > "Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Any thoughts on the overall approach ? > > Fragile and full of race conditions :-(. >
Yes, it looks a bit complex. But IMHO we can get around that. Do you have any ideas in mind about doing that ? > I thought from the beginning > that CREATE INDEX might be a showstopper for the whole HOT concept, > and it's starting to look like that's the case. I remember you raised this concern very early, but I am hopeful that we would be able to solve this. Would it be acceptable to have a simple (though not the best) solution for this release and then improve later on ? As I mentioned earlier, one option is to CHILL the table, if required, holding AccessExclusive lock, just like VACUUM FULL. I am assuming here that CREATE INDEX is not such a common activity, isn't that true ? > I think what we need to get away from is the assumption that HOT-ness > for one index is the same as HOT-ness for all. What if we only applied > HOT to primary-key indexes, so that there was certainly not more than > one index per table that the property applies to? > I think that will take away the ability to reuse HEAP_ONLY tuples without vacuuming the heap and index. Thanks, Pavan -- EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
