In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tom Lane writes:
>Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Using the same page for an updated tuple is generally a useful
>> optimization, so I don't think you have much hopes for having it
>> disabled.
>
>Especially not since there's no very reasonable way for
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Using the same page for an updated tuple is generally a useful
> optimization, so I don't think you have much hopes for having it
> disabled.
Especially not since there's no very reasonable way for anything as
low-level as heap_update to know that "the
Ian Dowse wrote:
> I've been seeing an issue with 8.1.4 that seems to be caused by the
> way UPDATE operations prefer to place the new row version in the
> same page as the original row. The issue is specific to UPDATEs;
> it does not occur when each UPDATE is replaced by a DELETE/INSERT
> pair. T
Hi,
I've been seeing an issue with 8.1.4 that seems to be caused by the
way UPDATE operations prefer to place the new row version in the
same page as the original row. The issue is specific to UPDATEs;
it does not occur when each UPDATE is replaced by a DELETE/INSERT
pair. The problem can prevent
