Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility

From: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
Date: 2018-03-19 00:06:41
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 03/18/18 19:28, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> It seems expensive to regex over BLCKSZ, but it’s probably the safest option
> and it’s not a performance critical codepath. Feel free to whack the test
> patch over the head with the above diff.

Both patches in a single email for cfbot's enjoyment, coming right up.


Attachment Content-Type Size
0002-Add-test-for-ensuring-WAL-segment-is-zeroed-out.patch text/x-patch 4.7 KB
0001-Zero-headers-of-unused-pages-after-WAL-switch.patch text/plain 1.5 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-03-19 00:25:20 Re: Flexible permissions for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2018-03-18 23:57:25 Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: multivariate histograms and MCV lists