Unix Technical Forum

RE: [Info-ingres] insert into heap!?

This is a discussion on RE: [Info-ingres] insert into heap!? within the Ingres forums, part of the Database Server Software category; --> <?xml version="1.0" ?> Marty, Again, don't recall rules or constraints being in the mix. What I do remember is ...


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > Ingres

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-20-2008, 08:13 PM
Ball, David
 
Posts: n/a
Default RE: [Info-ingres] insert into heap!?

<?xml version="1.0" ?>
Marty,

Again, don't recall rules or constraints being in the mix.

What I do remember is that this was the version of ingres where the standard
advice of 'always insert into heap, then modify afterwards' changed to
'modify first, and insert into the target structure' (as reflected in copydb
scripts).

When we reported our problem to CA we were told something along the lines
that this new advice reflected an underlying change, and that heap was now
inherrently slower. We found it hard to believe, but changing structures
seemed to prove it !

But, to get philosophical for a moment, if a man remembers something
differently today, who's to say whether he is any further from the truth?

Regards
Dave

Random Dave quote: "My memory is not what I remember it to have been."

-----Original Message-----
From: martin.bowes@ctsu.ox.ac.uk [mailto:martin.bowes@ctsu.ox.ac.uk]
Sent: 16 June 2005 09:07
To: Ball, David
Cc: info-ingres@cariboulake.com
Subject: RE: [Info-ingres] insert into heap!?


Hi David

Even in 6.4 I'm pretty sure that the insert into heap should fly
and give consistent performance no matter how full it is.

> Was a long time ago now, but I don't recall any indexes being
> involved.


May have been associated with a constraint.

What about an insert rule on the heap table? Something that says
An Insert into A means all this extra work on B and C and D ...Any of which
could have gone into overflow. Or have required an aggregate calculation...
>
> What about:
> - constant file extending?;


I would have thought that would be a constant. And not to lead
to
progressivly worse performance. The default extent of 16k is going to have
much the same performance on each attempt. I suppose if the disks were
extremely full and fragmented that this might be a problem.

> - an ingres bug (last resort of the desperate).


Always possible.
>
> Have to say, I'm happy to find I've been wrong!
>

Who said I'm right? According to the missus I havent been right
for years. If a man walks into the forest and says something and there is no
one around to hear. Is he still just as wrong?

Marty
--
Random Titus Quote #23:
Revenge is good.
It's what seperates us from animals and hippies.


************************************************** ********************

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended only
for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the
addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received this e-mail in
error and you must not copy, disseminate, distribute, use or take any action
as a result of the information contained in it.

If you have any queries, please contact the IT Service Desk on 1870
(01384-275454).

postmaster@npower.com

************************************************** ********************






This e-mail is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute investment or transactional advice. For the avoidance of doubt the contents of this email are subject to contract and will not constitute a legally binding contract.

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended only for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received this e-mail in error and you must not copy, disseminate, distribute, use or take any action as a result of the information contained in it.

If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify postmaster@npower.com (UK 01384 275454) and delete it immediately from your system.

Neither Npower nor any of the other companies in the RWE Npower group from whom this e-mail originates accept any responsibility for losses or damage as a result of any viruses and it is your responsibility to check attachments (if any) for viruses.
Npower Limited Registered office: Windmill Hill Business Park, Whitehill Way, Swindon SN5 6PB. Registered in England and Wales: number 3653277. This e-mail may be sent on behalf of a member of the RWE Npower group of companies.

************************************************** ********************

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
www.UnixAdminTalk.com