Decibel! wrote:
The advantage to Bruce's idea is that it sounds pretty simple to
implement. While it wouldn't be of use for many general cases, it
*would* be useful for read-only tables, ie: old partitions.
Wouldn't the mostcommon case by foreign key checks against tables that
essentially map
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 11:54 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible
>>> and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index scans.
> I think it's too coarse-grained to be really us
On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 04:06:35PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Jeff Davis wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 11:54 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
> > >
> > > > A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visi
Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 11:54 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
> >
> > > A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible
> > > and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index s
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 11:54 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
>
> > A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible
> > and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index scans.
> > Any change to th
On Aug 15, 2007, at 1:54 PM, Gregory Stark wrote:
A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are
visible
and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index
scans.
Any change to the table would have to clear the flag. To detect
changes during the heap scan a
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
> >
> >> A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible
> >> and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index scans.
> >
Message-
From: Gregory Stark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 02:58 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: Bruce Momjian
Cc: PostgreSQL-development
Subject:Re: [HACKERS] Another idea for index-only scans
"Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
"Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
>
>> A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible
>> and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index scans.
>> Any change to the table would h
Bruce,
> I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
> > A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are
> > visible and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index
> > scans. Any change to the table would have to clear the flag. To
> > detect ch
On 8/15/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
>
> > A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible
> > and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index scans.
> > Any change to the ta
I have added another idea for index-only scans to the TODO list:
> A third idea would be for a heap scan to check if all rows are visible
> and if so set a per-table flag which can be checked by index scans.
> Any change to the table would have to clear the flag. To detect
> changes durin
12 matches
Mail list logo
