Re: Remove custom redundant full page write description from GIN

Arseniy Mukhin <arseniy.mukhin.dev@gmail.com>

From: Arseniy Mukhin <arseniy.mukhin.dev@gmail.com>

To: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>

Cc: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>

Date: 2025-10-14T06:54:08Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Improve description of some WAL records for GIN
- 138da727a174 19 (unreleased) landed
Add comment in ginxlog.h about block used with ginxlogInsertListPage
- 42c6b74d8928 19 (unreleased) landed
Remove block information from description of some WAL records for GIN
- 7072a8855e84 19 (unreleased) landed
Remove useless pointer update in ginxlog.c
- 3f431109dc63 19 (unreleased) landed

On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 11:59 PM Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2025, 01:24 Arseniy Mukhin, <arseniy.mukhin.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 10:00 PM Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > On 9 Oct 2025, at 17:33, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Should we remove them, reducing overall cognitive complexity of GIN
>> > > internals and reducing WAL footprint?
>> >
>> > The patch does not add a single line... that's impressive :)
>> >
>> > Why not wipe ginxlogSplit entirely? Will the code be clearer with XLogRegisterData(&flags, sizeof(uint16))?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Looks like we will not be able to process old split records after
>> this, as 'flags' field offset was changed. So probably these fields
>> are for backward compatibility. Does it make sense?
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Arseniy Mukhin
>
>
> Hi! We do not need to support anything WAL related in new major version, since we do new initdb. There are couple of threads nearby that change WAL record layout or even drop them entirely, and that OK.
> Also, we have WAL magic number for this purpose

I see, sorry for the noise then and thanks for the explanation!


Best regards,
Arseniy Mukhin