| From: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com, hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Reduce pinning in btree indexes |
| Date: | 2015-02-27 07:26:38 |
| Message-ID: | 87zj7z6ckc.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>>>> "Kyotaro" == Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> You might want to try running the same test, but after patching
>> ExecSupportsMarkRestore to return false for index scans. This will
>> cause the planner to insert a Materialize node to handle the
>> mark/restore.
Kyotaro> Mmm? The patch bt-nopin-v1.patch seems not contain the change
Kyotaro> for ExecSupportMarkRestore and the very simple function remain
Kyotaro> looking to return true for T_Index(Only)Scan after the patch
Kyotaro> applied.
Right. I'm suggesting you change that, in order to determine what
performance cost, if any, would result from abandoning the idea of doing
mark/restore entirely.
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2015-02-27 08:14:24 | Re: Reduce pinning in btree indexes |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-02-27 07:26:08 | Re: Merge compact/non compact commits, make aborts dynamically sized |