Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Effective storage of duplicates in B-tree index.

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Anastasia Lubennikova <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Юрий Соколов <funny.falcon@gmail.com>
Date: 2020-02-20T20:59:43Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:58 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> I think that there is a good chance that it just won't matter. The
> number of indexes that won't be able to support deduplication will be
> very small in practice. The important exceptions are INCLUDE indexes
> and nondeterministic collations. These exceptions make sense
> intuitively, and will be documented as limitations of those other
> features.

I wasn't clear about the implication of what I was saying here, which
is: I will make the NOTICE a DEBUG1 message, and leave everything else
as-is in the initial committed version.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



Commits

  1. Teach pageinspect about nbtree deduplication.

  2. Doc: Fix deduplicate_items index term.

  3. Revise BTP_HAS_GARBAGE nbtree VACUUM comments.

  4. Remove unneeded "pin scan" nbtree VACUUM code.

  5. Cleanup code in reloptions.h regarding reloption handling

  6. Catch invalid typlens in a couple of places

  7. Compute XID horizon for page level index vacuum on primary.

  8. Make heap TID a tiebreaker nbtree index column.

  9. Avoid pin scan for replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM in all cases

  10. Revert buggy optimization of index scans

  11. Restructure index access method API to hide most of it at the C level.

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

  13. Avoid scanning nulls at the beginning of a btree index scan.