Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Yes. Let me add some TODO items:
>
> * Add deleted bit to index tuples to reduce heap access
ISTM this isn't a bad idea. However note that there remains only
1 bit unused in IndexTupleData.
Regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Seems a better solution would be to put a 'deleted' bit in the index so
> > we would have to visit those heap tuples only once for a committed
> > status. Similar to what we do with heap tuples so we don't have to
> > visit pg_log repeatedly.
>
> T
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not quite sure how to implement this, but I wanted to toss the idea
> out for discussion. Probably we'd have to have some cooperation between
> the heap_update level (where the fact that it's an update is known, and
> where we'd have a chance to test fo
> I'm not quite sure how to implement this, but I wanted to toss the idea
> out for discussion. Probably we'd have to have some cooperation between
> the heap_update level (where the fact that it's an update is known, and
> where we'd have a chance to test for changes in particular columns) and
>
