Re: [PATCH] Speedup truncates of relation forks

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: "Jamison, Kirk" <k(dot)jamison(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: 'Fujii Masao' <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Adrien Nayrat <adrien(dot)nayrat(at)anayrat(dot)info>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Speedup truncates of relation forks
Date: 2019-09-17 05:25:20
Message-ID: 20190917052520.GG1660@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 01:44:12AM +0000, Jamison, Kirk wrote:
> On Friday, September 13, 2019 10:06 PM (GMT+9), Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 9:51 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>>> As committed, the smgrdounlinkfork case is actually dead code; it's
>>>> never called from anywhere. I left it in place just in case we want
>>>> it someday.
>>>
>>> but if no use has appeared in 7 years, I say it's time to kill it.
>>
>> +1
>
> The consensus is we remove it, right?

Yes. Just adding my +1 to nuke the function.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2019-09-17 06:21:34 Re: [DOC] Document auto vacuum interruption
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-09-17 05:13:39 Re: [HACKERS] CLUSTER command progress monitor