Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Jaime Casanova <jaime.casanova@2ndquadrant.com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-03-14T17:17:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
After looking at how index_fetch_heap and heap_hot_search_buffer
interact, I can't say I'm in love with the idea.  I started thinking
that we should not have index_fetch_heap release the buffer lock only to
re-acquire it five lines later, so it should keep the buffer lock, do
the recheck and only release it afterwards (I realize that this means
there'd be need for two additional "else release buffer lock" branches);
but then this got me thinking that perhaps it would be better to have
another routine that does both call heap_hot_search_buffer and then call
recheck -- it occurs to me that what we're doing here is essentially
heap_warm_search_buffer.

Does that make sense?

Another thing is BuildIndexInfo being called over and over for each
recheck().  Surely we need to cache the indexinfo for each indexscan.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


Commits

  1. Implement SortSupport for macaddr data type

  2. Simplify check of modified attributes in heap_update

  3. Remove direct uses of ItemPointer.{ip_blkid,ip_posid}

  4. Fix CatalogTupleInsert/Update abstraction for case of shared indstate.

  5. Provide CatalogTupleDelete() as a wrapper around simple_heap_delete().

  6. Band-aid fix for incorrect use of view options as StdRdOptions.

  7. Update visibility map in the second phase of vacuum.

  8. Avoid having two copies of the HOT-chain search logic.

  9. Postgres95 1.01 Distribution - Virgin Sources