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

Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction

From: Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction
Date: 2013-01-01 16:43:53
Message-ID: 50E31249.3060403@fuzzy.cz (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 1.1.2013 17:35, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> There was an earlier suggestion by Andres Freund to use memcmp()
> instead, but I don't see that in the latest posted version of the patch;
> was there a specific rationale for taking it out or it was just lost in
> the shuffle?

No, I've tried that approach with a comparator like this:

    static int
    rnode_comparator(const void * p1, const void * p2)
    {
            return memcmp(p1, p2, sizeof(RelFileNode));
    }

but it turned out to be slower than the current comparator. I've posted
some benchmark results and possible explanation on 20/12 (message
50D26FE8(dot)1040800(at)fuzzy(dot)cz).

If you could verify my results, that'd be great.

Tomas


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Boszormenyi ZoltanDate: 2013-01-01 16:48:48
Subject: Review of "pg_basebackup and pg_receivexlog to use non-blocking socket communication", was: Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2013-01-01 16:35:39
Subject: Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction

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