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

Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance
Date: 2010-04-16 14:52:49
Message-ID: 1271429569.8305.8477.camel@ebony (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 10:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > I didn't handle xid wraparound correctly in the binary search, need to use
> > TransactionIdFollows instead of plan >.
> I think you're outsmarting yourself there.  A binary search will in fact
> *not work* with circular xid comparison (this is exactly why there's no
> btree opclass for XID).  You need to use plain >, and make sure the
> array you're searching is ordered that way too.  The other way might
> accidentally fail to malfunction if you only tested ranges of XIDs that
> weren't long enough to wrap around, but that doesn't make it right.

I don't understand the exact, please explain more.

I'm not using bsearch() just a quick chop based upon xid comparison,
which looks to me like it will work.

 Simon Riggs 

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-04-16 15:10:45
Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-04-16 14:39:52
Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group