Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, hlinnakangas@vmware.com, noah@leadboat.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2013-01-11T15:57:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 11 January 2013 14:24, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> wrote: > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/6C0B27F7206C9E4CA54AE035729E9C3828 > 52DE51@szxeml509-mbs > > 1. However Heikki has pointed, it has some problems similar to for HOT > implementation and that is the reason we have done memcmp for HOT. > 2. Also we have found in initial readings that this doesn't have any > performance difference as compare to current Approach. OK, forget that idea. >> I've moved this to the next CF. I'm planning to review this one first. > > Thank you. Just reviewing the patch now, making more sense with comments added. In heap_delta_encode() do we store which columns have changed? Do we store the whole new column value? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services