From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pageinspect: Hash index support |
Date: | 2016-09-20 07:19:53 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSLVbe-wXCd77CMx6vHKfRd6thUwv7nzP54Lv9k4Q6hww@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:11 AM, Jesper Pedersen
<jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com> wrote:
> This version adds the overloaded get_raw_page based methods. However, I'm
> not verifying the page other than page_id, as hasho_flag can contain
> multiple flags in Amit's patches. And, I don't see having different page ids
> as a benefit - at least not part of this patch.
>
> We should probably just have one of the method sets, so I'll send a v3 with
> the set voted for.
>
> I kept the 'data' field as is, for now.
$ git diff master --check
contrib/pageinspect/hashfuncs.c:758: space before tab in indent.
+ values);
That's always good to run to check the format of a patch before sending it.
You did not get right the comments from Alvaro upthread. The following
functions are added with this patch:
function hash_metap(text)
function hash_metap_bytea(bytea)
function hash_page_items(text,integer)
function hash_page_items_bytea(bytea)
function hash_page_stats(text,integer)
function hash_page_stats_bytea(bytea,integer)
Now the following set of functions would be sufficient:
function hash_metapage_info(bytea)
function hash_page_items(bytea)
function hash_page_stats(bytea)
The last time pageinspect has been updated, when BRIN functions have
been added, it has been discussed to just use (bytea) as an argument
interface and just rely on get_raw_page() to get the pages wanted, so
I think that we had better stick with that and keep things simple.
Note: the patch checks if a superuser is calling the new functions,
which is a good thing.
I am switching the patch back to "waiting on author". As far as I can
see the patch is in rather good shape, you just need to adapt the docs
and shave all the parts that are not needed for the final result.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2016-09-20 07:39:55 | Use of SizeOfIptrData - is that obsolete? |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-09-20 06:40:54 | Re: Speedup twophase transactions |