Re: Microvacuum support for Hash Index

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Microvacuum support for Hash Index
Date: 2017-03-18 08:35:34
Message-ID: CAA4eK1Kd=mJ9xreovcsh0qMiAj-QqCphHVQ_Lfau1DR9oVjASQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>> As I said in my previous e-mail, I think you need
>>>> to record clearing of this flag in WAL record XLOG_HASH_DELETE as you
>>>> are not doing this unconditionally and then during replay clear it
>>>> only when the WAL record indicates the same.
>>>
>>> Thank you so much for putting that point. I too think that we should
>>> record the flag status in the WAL record and clear it only when
>>> required during replay.
>>>
>>
>> I think hashdesc.c needs an update (refer case XLOG_HASH_DELETE:).
>
> Done. Thanks!
>

This version looks good to me.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2017-03-18 08:52:14 Re: Patch to improve performance of replay of AccessExclusiveLock
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2017-03-18 08:04:30 Re: pageinspect and hash indexes