
> > Could the index scan be made to
> > handle cases where the index tuple it was stopped on is gone?
> 
> Don't see how.  With no equal keys, you could test each tuple you scan
> over to see if it's > the expected key; but that would slow things down
> tremendously I fear.  In any case it fails completely when there are
> equal keys, since you could not tell where in a run of equal keys to
> resume scanning.  You really have to find the exact index tuple you
> stopped on, AFAICS.

Won't it still point to the same heap page and slot ? That additional info 
should be sufficient to find the exact index tuple. 
And it usually won't be that far away, no ?

Andreas

Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:14:41 +0200
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>
Re: Think I see a btree vacuuming bug 
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at> writes:
>>> Could the index scan be made to
>>> handle cases where the index tuple it was stopped on is gone?

> Won't it still point to the same heap page and slot ?

Not if it's gone ...

			regards, tom lane

Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:06:52 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Think I see a btree vacuuming bug 