Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Refactoring the API for amgetmulti

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, Jie Zhang <jzhang(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
Subject: Re: Refactoring the API for amgetmulti
Date: 2006-07-26 15:59:52
Message-ID: 3174.1153929592@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> I've considered whether it's worthwhile going to other way: getting the
> IndexScan executer node to uses getmulti to reduce index AM overhead.
> But that requires backward scan support also...

I think Heikki got most of the low-hanging fruit already with that patch
for page-at-a-time scanning in btree.  There's some wasted overhead just
from multiple levels of function call, but I doubt it's really a big
deal anymore.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bort, PaulDate: 2006-07-26 16:01:49
Subject: Re: Better name/syntax for "online" index creation
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2006-07-26 15:54:31
Subject: Re: Refactoring the API for amgetmulti

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group