From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: HOT synced with HEAD |
Date: | 2007-09-16 16:47:28 |
Message-ID: | 2e78013d0709160947t179e45c9w3849677d19622330@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On 9/16/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Attached is as far as I've gotten with reviewing the HOT patch; I see
> that Pavan is still fooling with it so we'd better re-sync.
I am done with most of the items on my plate. I was not sure how
far you have gone with the patch, so was trying to finish as many
items as possible myself. Now that I know you have started refactoring
the code, I would try not to change it unless its urgent. And when its
required, I will send a add-on patch just the way I did earlier.
Let me know if you want me to focus of something at this point.
> * Many API cleanups, in particular I didn't like what had been done
> to heap_fetch and thought it better to split out the chain-following
> logic
I liked those changes. I am wondering if we could have avoided
duplicating the chain following code in heap_hot_search_buffer and
index_getnext. But I trust your judgment.
I also liked the way you reverted the API changes to various index build
methods.
I would test the patch tomorrow in detail.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-09-16 17:19:09 | Re: Latest README.HOT |
Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-09-16 15:57:46 | Re: PL/TCL Patch to prevent postgres from becoming multithreaded |