From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Pass heaprel to GlobalVisTestFor() in vacuumRedirectAndPlaceholder() |
Date: | 2023-04-03 00:19:45 |
Message-ID: | 20230403001945.cdp637kacrtmsoja@awork3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-04-02 15:52:14 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 3:30 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > > Actually, I suppose that isn't quite true, since you'd still need to
> > > find a way to pass the heap relation down to nbtree VACUUM. Say by
> > > adding it to IndexVacuumInfo.
> >
> > It has been added to that already, so it should really be as trivial as you
> > suggested earlier...
>
> Oh yeah, I missed it because you put it at the end of the struct,
> rather than at the start, next to the existing Relation.
Well, Bertrand. But I didn't change it, so you're not wrong...
> This page deletion issue matters a lot more after the Postgres 14
> optimization added by commit e5d8a99903, which came after your
> GlobalVisCheckRemovableFullXid() snapshot scalability work (well, a
> few months after, at least). I really don't like the idea of something
> like that being much less effective due to logical decoding.
Yea, it's definitely good to use the relation there.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joseph Koshakow | 2023-04-03 00:32:26 | Re: Infinite Interval |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-04-02 23:09:11 | Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys |