Re: Patch queue triage

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch queue triage
Date: 2007-05-02 08:43:32
Message-ID: 87r6pzehu3.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:

> On 5/2/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>
>> This needs a *lot* of review. Can we break it down into more manageable
>> chunks?
>
> Sure, we can do that. I actually did that when I posted the
> incremental versions of the HOT-patch, each version implementing
> the next big chunk of the code. I can reverse engineer that again.

Can we? I mean, sure you can break the patch up into chunks which might make
it easier to read, but are any of the chunks useful alone?

I suppose inserting HOT tuples without index maintenance is useful even if no
changes to the space allocation is made is useful. It won't get the space
usage but it would save on index thrashing. But that still implies all the
code to handle scans, updates, index builds, etc. Those chunks could be
separated out but you can't commit without them.

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2007-05-02 09:08:53 Re: Patch queue triage
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2007-05-02 08:23:49 Re: Feature freeze progress report