| From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com |
| Cc: | amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Patch] Optimize dropping of relation buffers using dlist |
| Date: | 2020-09-02 01:36:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20200902.103613.1072606648076754504.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I'd like make a subtle correction.
At Wed, 02 Sep 2020 10:31:22 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> By the way
>
> > #define BUF_DROP_THRESHOLD 500 /* NBuffers divided by 2 */
>
> NBuffers is not a constant. Even if we wanted to set the macro as
> described in the comment, we should have used (NBuffers/2) instead of
> "500". But I suppose you might wanted to use (NBuffders / 500) as Tom
> suggested upthread. And the name of the macro seems too generic. I
Who made the suggestion is Andres, not Tom. Sorry for the mistake.
> think more specific names like BUF_DROP_FULLSCAN_THRESHOLD would be
> better.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-09-02 01:39:44 | Re: 回复：how to create index concurrently on partitioned table |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2020-09-02 01:31:22 | Re: [Patch] Optimize dropping of relation buffers using dlist |