On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:47 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 11:29 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> How does the attached patch look like? It's probably similar to what you
> >> had in mind.
> > It looks like a second version of what I'm working on and about to
> > publish. I'll take that as a compliment!
> > My patch is attached here also, for discussion.
> > The two patches look same in their main parts, though I have quite a few
> > extra tweaks in there, which you can read about in comments.
> Yeah. Yours seems a lot more complex with all those extra tweaks, I
> would suggest to keep it simple. I did realize one bug in my patch: I
> didn't handle xid wraparound correctly in the binary search, need to use
> TransactionIdFollows instead of plan >.
Almost done, yes, much simpler. I wrote a lot of that in the wee small
hours last night, so the difference is amusing.
And I spotted that bug, plus the off by one error also. Just rewritten
all other parts, so no worries.
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-04-16 14:39:52|
|Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance |
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2010-04-16 11:47:42|
|Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance|