Simon Riggs wrote: > > This problem is solved by moving the wait (for all transactions in > reference snapshot to finish) so that it is now between the first and > second scans, as described. > > During the second Vscan we would prune each block, so the only remaining > tuple in the block when the second scan sees it would be (10,30) and it > would no longer be a HOT tuple - the index would have a pointer to it, > so no new index pointer would be added. The pointer to (10,30) is the > same pointer that was added in the first phase for the tuple (10,20). >
The problem is that in the first phase, the pointer was inserted with key=20 whereas now its changed to 30. So we need to delete the old index entry and add a new one. Thanks, Pavan -- EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
