Horton

Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples

Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Юрий Соколов <funny.falcon@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Sokolov Yura <funny.falcon@postgrespro.ru>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-11-29T01:44:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> Maybe it's a stupid question. But would we still want to have this after
>> the change? These should be just specializations of the template version
>> imo.
>
> I also wonder why regression test output has changed. Wasn't this
> supposed to be a mechanical change in how the templating is
> implemented? Why would the behavior of the algorithm change, even if
> the change is only a change in the output order among equal elements?
>
> Also, is that one last raw CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in the template
> definition supposed to be there?

As work is still going on here I am moving the patch to next CF.
-- 
Michael

Commits

  1. Avoid looping through line pointers twice in PageRepairFragmentation().

  2. Reduce pinning and buffer content locking for btree scans.

  3. Speed up in-memory tuplesorting.