| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Clarification about HOT |
| Date: | 2007-11-02 16:21:38 |
| Message-ID: | 472B4E92.1060807@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote:
> I understand that if you have to Vacuum a tuple, it has to satisfy the
> necessary snapshot requirements. i will never be able to reduce the chain to
> just one, because the there is always a indirection at the top of HOT. I
> understood this.
>
> My question was is it the only reason for the decision to stop HOT across
> pages.
Another reason is that it avoids the whole problem of updating multiple
pages atomically, without deadlocks.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gokulakannan Somasundaram | 2007-11-02 16:22:50 | Re: Proposal: Select ... AS OF Savepoint |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2007-11-02 16:17:04 | Re: minimal update |