From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Önder Kalacı <onderkalaci(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: doc: improve the restriction description of using indexes on REPLICA IDENTITY FULL table. |
Date: | 2023-07-24 03:04:55 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KMs8r=XhUgDw1Ciqu6N728dKLY=p49t8EZbS7nXztTRw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 6:39 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:32 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > You have moved most of the comments related to the restriction of
> > which index can be picked atop IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull().
> > Now, the comments related to limitation atop
> > FindUsableIndexForReplicaIdentityFull() look slightly odd as it refers
> > to limitations but those limitation were not stated. The comments I am
> > referring to are: "Note that the limitations of index scans for
> > replica identity full only .... might not be a good idea in some
> > cases". Shall we move these as well atop
> > IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull()?
>
> Good point.
>
> Looking at neighbor comments, the following comment looks slightly odd to me:
>
> * XXX: See IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull() to know the challenges in
> * supporting indexes other than btree and hash. For partial indexes, the
> * required changes are likely to be larger. If none of the tuples satisfy
> * the expression for the index scan, we fall-back to sequential execution,
> * which might not be a good idea in some cases.
>
> Are the first and second sentences related actually?
>
Not really.
> I think we can move it as well to
> IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull() with some adjustments. I've
> attached the updated patch that incorporated your comment and included
> my idea to update the comment.
>
LGTM.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-07-24 03:30:15 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2023-07-24 03:01:01 | Re: Support worker_spi to execute the function dynamically. |