Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
To: "'Heikki Linnakangas'" <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
Cc: <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, "'Alvaro Herrera'" <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, <noah@leadboat.com>, <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-01-29T14:11:49Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:53 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 29.01.2013 11:58, Amit Kapila wrote: > > Can there be another way with which current patch code can be made > better, > > so that we don't need to change the encoding approach, as I am having > > feeling that this might not be performance wise equally good. > > The point is that I don't want to heap_delta_encode() to know the > internals of pglz compression. You could probably make my patch more > like yours in behavior by also passing an array of offsets in the new > tuple to check, and only checking for matches as those offsets. I think it makes sense, because if we have offsets of both new and old tuple, we can internally use memcmp to compare columns and use same algorithm for encoding. I will change the patch according to this suggestion. With Regards, Amit Kapila.
Commits
-
Flush stderr and stdout in isolation tester.
- 63d283ecd0bc 9.3.0 cited