Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > My basic idea was to keep a status bit on each index entry telling it if
> > a previous backend looked at the heap and determined it was valid.
> 
> Even if you could track the tuple's committed-good status reliably,
> that isn't enough under MVCC.  The tuple might be committed good, and
> seen that way by some other backend that set the bit, and yet it's not
> supposed to be visible to your older transaction.  Or the reverse at
> tuple deletion.

I mentioned that:

> (Oh, and you could only update the bit when all active transactions
> are newer than the creation transaction so we know they should all see
> it as visible.)

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073