Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-12-14T22:14:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
The GiST scan algorithm uses LSNs to detect concurrent pages splits, but
- 2edc5cd493ce 9.1.0 cited
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> Hmm, the first idea that comes to mind is to use a counter like the >>> GetXLogRecPtrForTemp() counter I used for temp tables, but global, in shared >>> memory. However, that's a bit problematic because if we store a value from >>> that counter to LSN, it's possible that the counter overtakes the XLOG >>> insert location, and you start to get xlog flush errors. We could avoid that >>> if we added a new field to the GiST page header, and used that to store the >>> value in the parent page instead of the LSN. > >> That doesn't seem ideal, either, because now you're eating up some >> number of bytes per page in every GIST index just on the off chance >> that one of them is unlogged. > > On-disk compatibility seems problematic here as well. Good point. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company