Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Date: 2022-09-17 21:42:10
Message-ID: 20220917214210.GA3189289@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 02:54:14PM +0700, John Naylor wrote:
> Here again, I'd rather put this off and focus on getting the "large
> details" in good enough shape so we can got towards integrating with
> vacuum.

I started a new thread for the SIMD patch [0] so that this thread can
remain focused on the radix tree stuff.

[0] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220917052903.GA3172400%40nathanxps13

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2022-09-17 21:54:27 Re: remove more archiving overhead
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2022-09-17 19:58:41 Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names