| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Relation extension scalability |
| Date: | 2016-03-29 01:59:58 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYnp7w_OCN=nHEytm6-6aMr4oXhsozC6J6czS3MzrN0GQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Found one problem with V15, so sending the new version.
> In V15 I am taking prev_blkno as targetBlock instead it should be the last
> block of the relation at that time. Attaching new patch.
BlockNumber targetBlock,
- otherBlock;
+ otherBlock,
+ prev_blkno = RelationGetNumberOfBlocks(relation);
Absolutely not. There is no way it's acceptable to introduce an
unconditional call to RelationGetNumberOfBlocks() into every call to
RelationGetBufferForTuple().
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kouhei Kaigai | 2016-03-29 03:00:36 | Re: Reworks of CustomScan serialization/deserialization |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-29 01:56:35 | Re: Relation extension scalability |