Re: [HACKERS] Duplicating transaction information in indexes and

2003-10-27 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Tom Lane wrote: Shridhar Daithankar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: What are (more) reasons for not adding transaction information to index tuple, in addition to heap tuple? Cons are bloated indexes. The index tuple size will be close to 30 bytes minimum. And extra time to perform an update or del

Re: [HACKERS] Duplicating transaction information in indexes and performing in memory vacuum

2003-10-27 Thread Tom Lane
Shridhar Daithankar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What are (more) reasons for not adding transaction information to > index tuple, in addition to heap tuple? > Cons are bloated indexes. The index tuple size will be close to 30 > bytes minimum. And extra time to perform an update or delete, and ex

[HACKERS] Duplicating transaction information in indexes and performing in memory vacuum

2003-10-27 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Hi, Last week, there was a thread whether solely in memory vacuum can be performed or not.(OK, that was a part of thread but anyways) I suggested that a page be vacuumed when it is pushed out of buffer cache. Tom pointed out that it can not be done as index tuples stote heap tuple id and depen