| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Why are we PageInit'ing buffers in RelationAddExtraBlocks()? |
| Date: | 2018-12-19 22:28:17 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZRwKbf6q7TXEpwMX_vdjfeGEKudR8mofnmTwZg6O9=kg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 3:39 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Thinking about whether it's worth to allow to extend that function in an
> extensible manner made me wonder: Is it actually a good idea to
> initialize the page at that point, including marking it dirty?
As far as I can recall, my motivation was to avoid increasing the
number of warnings produced by VACUUM. If those warnings are going
away, then I don't know that there's any reason to keep that code as
it is. But I am not sure whether such a move would provoke any
opposition.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-12-19 22:37:36 | Re: Why are we PageInit'ing buffers in RelationAddExtraBlocks()? |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2018-12-19 22:08:30 | Re: Some memory allocations in gin fastupdate code are a bit brain dead |