Re: Optimization for lazy_scan_heap

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Anastasia Lubennikova <lubennikovaav(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Optimization for lazy_scan_heap
Date: 2016-10-17 07:39:51
Message-ID: CAD21AoDrRwZm-nqi1scwLDXioFJTJa7RqXNE7H1Ae5uiYCCH_A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:26 AM, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Some initial comments on optimize_lazy_scan_heap_v2.patch.
>
> Seems worth pursuing. Marking as returned with feedback because of
> lack of activity and some basic reviews sent.

Thank you for reviewing this patch, and sorry for my late reply.

I've measured the performance improvement of this patch, but I got the
result showing that it can improve vacuum freeze performance 30 sec
with 32TB table. I don't think that this patch is worth to pursue any
further, so I'd like to withdraw this.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2016-10-17 07:50:06 Re: postgres_fdw super user checks
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2016-10-17 07:32:54 Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers