Re: Hash Indexes
Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>
From: Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Mithun Cy <mithun.cy@enterprisedb.com>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-09-01T18:03:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 08/05/2016 07:36 AM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Mithun Cy <mithun.cy@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> I did some basic testing of same. In that I found one issue with cursor. >> > > Thanks for the testing. The reason for failure was that the patch > didn't take into account the fact that for scrolling cursors, scan can > reacquire the lock and pin on bucket buffer multiple times. I have > fixed it such that we release the pin on bucket buffers after we scan > the last overflow page in bucket. Attached patch fixes the issue for > me, let me know if you still see the issue. > Needs a rebase. hashinsert.c + * reuse the space. There is no such apparent benefit from finsihing the -> finishing hashpage.c + * retrun the buffer, else return InvalidBuffer. -> return + if (blkno == P_NEW) + elog(ERROR, "hash AM does not use P_NEW"); Left over ? + * for unlocking it. -> for unlocking them. hashsearch.c + * bucket, but not pin, then acuire the lock on new bucket and again -> acquire hashutil.c + * half. It is mainly required to finsh the incomplete splits where we are -> finish Ran some tests on a CHAR() based column which showed good results. Will have to compare with a run with the WAL patch applied. make check-world passes. Best regards, Jesper
Commits
-
Remove _hash_wrtbuf() in favor of calling MarkBufferDirty().
- 25216c989384 10.0 landed
-
Fix race introduced by 6d46f4783efe457f74816a75173eb23ed8930020.
- 2f4193c3509a 10.0 cited
-
Improve hash index bucket split behavior.
- 6d46f4783efe 10.0 landed
-
Reduce pinning and buffer content locking for btree scans.
- 2ed5b87f96d4 9.5.0 cited