Horton

Re: non-HOT update not looking at FSM for large tuple update

Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>
To: John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>, Floris Van Nee <florisvannee@optiver.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-03-19T18:42:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 at 19:16, John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 5:30 PM Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This is slightly more verbose, but I think this clarifies the
> > reasoning why we need this a bit better. Feel free to reject or adapt
> > as needed.
>
> I like this in general, but still has some rough edges. I've made another attempt in v5 incorporating your suggestions. Let me know what you think.

That is indeed better.

I believe this is ready, so I've marked it as RFC in the commitfest application.

With regards,

Matthias van de Meent.

Commits

  1. Accept slightly-filled pages for tuples larger than fillfactor.