| From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, rmt(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Revert RI fast-path batching from REL_19_STABLE |
| Date: | 2026-09-09 15:41:46 |
| Message-ID: | CAAKRu_aM2OhV+Sp14CNwnrjKxuS-9NFTexTrBi6c_1TAzJp=Yw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 8:26 AM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> That still leaves your concern about whether the per-row path is
> sufficiently solid for v19. The snapshot fixes and Amit's recent
> collation report show that there are differences from SPI that we (I)
> missed. The proposed collation fix falls back to SPI when the
> referenced index and column collations differ. I still propose
> retaining the per-row path, but agree that its readiness needs to be
> assessed separately from the decision to remove batching.
I think a good start would be to revert the batching ASAP so that we
can consider the state after independently.
- Melanie
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sami Imseih | 2026-09-09 15:41:47 | Re: Reject WAIT FOR earlier in transaction-snapshot mode |
| Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2026-09-09 15:40:54 | Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication |