| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: refactoring relation extension and BufferAlloc(), faster COPY |
| Date: | 2023-02-22 22:07:39 |
| Message-ID: | 20230222220739.g6owjfzuecoxa4pj@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-02-21 11:22:26 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-02-21 18:18:02 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > Do other ReadBufferModes than RBM_ZERO_AND_LOCK make sense with
> > ExtendRelationBuffered?
>
> Hm. That's a a good point. Probably not. Perhaps it could be useful to support
> RBM_NORMAL as well? But even if, it'd just be a lock release away if we always
> used RBM_ZERO_AND_LOCK.
There's a fair number of callers using RBM_NORMAL, via ReadBuffer[Extended]()
right now. While some of them are trivial to convert, others aren't (e.g.,
brin_getinsertbuffer()). So I'm inclined to continue allowing RBM_NORMAL.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2023-02-22 22:19:28 | Re: Experiments with Postgres and SSL |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2023-02-22 22:03:13 | Re: pgindent vs. git whitespace check |