be delivered directly to the collector process. The extra process context
swaps required to transfer data through the buffer process seem to outweigh
any value the buffering might have. Per recent discussion and tests.
I modified Bruce's draft patch to use poll() rather than select() where
available (this makes a noticeable difference on my system), and fixed
up the EXEC_BACKEND case.
< o Add support for WITH HOLD cursors
> o Add support for WITH HOLD and SCROLL cursors
>
> PL/pgSQL cursors should support the same syntax as
> backend cursors.
>
< * %Disallow changing DEFAULT expression of a SERIAL column?
<
< This should be done only if the existing SERIAL problems cannot be
< fixed.
<
> * -Disallow changing DEFAULT expression of a SERIAL column
will be expanded to a list of their member fields, rather than creating
a nested rowtype field as formerly. (The old behavior is still available
by omitting '.*'.) This syntax is not allowed by the SQL spec AFAICS,
so changing its behavior doesn't violate the spec. The new behavior is
substantially more useful since it allows, for example, triggers to check
for data changes with 'if row(new.*) is distinct from row(old.*)'. Per
my recent proposal.
< * Reuse index tuples that point to rows that are not visible to anyone?
> * Reuse index tuples that point to heap tuples that are not visible to
> anyone?
< * Allow heap reuse of UPDATEd rows if old and new versions are on the
< same heap page?
> * Allow heap reuse of UPDATEd rows if no indexed columns are changed,
> and old and new versions are on the same heap page?
< This is possible for same-page updates because a single index row
< can point to both old and new values.
> While vacuum handles DELETEs fine, updating of non-indexed columns, like
> counters, are difficult for VACUUM to handle efficiently. This method
> is possible for same-page updates because a single index row can be
> used to point to both old and new values.
>
> * Allow heap reuse of UPDATEd rows if old and new versions are on the
> same heap page?
>
> This is possible for same-page updates because a single index row
> can point to both old and new values.
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-06/msg01305.php
current commands; instead, store current-status information in shared
memory. This substantially reduces the overhead of stats_command_string
and also ensures that pg_stat_activity is fully up to date at all times.
Per my recent proposal.
Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane
Neil Conway
Peter Eisentraut
Andrew Dunstan