Re: Review: GIN non-intrusive vacuum of posting tree

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: amborodin(at)acm(dot)org
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Vladimir Borodin <root(at)simply(dot)name>
Subject: Re: Review: GIN non-intrusive vacuum of posting tree
Date: 2017-01-31 06:50:36
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSW1kJtYVBQ4LOHyeHO-Uavdg+7FYF=_BbEfM1DzxTxBA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Andrew Borodin <borodin(at)octonica(dot)com> wrote:
> I'll summarize here my state of studying concurrent methods of page unlinking.
>
> GIN B-tree does not have "high key". That means, that rightmost key on
> a page is maximal for the non-leaf page.
> But I do not see anything theoretical in a way of implementation of
> Lanin and Shasha`s methods of page merging, with slight modifications.
> Their paper does not even mention high key(high fence key in papers by
> Goetz Graefe).
>
> But it's not a simple task due to large portions of shared code
> between entry tree and posting tree.
>
> Also, I do not see a reason why this method can be practically
> superior to proposed patch.
>
> Currently, I do not have resources to implement a proof of concept for
> fully concurrent page unlinking to make benchmarking.

I am marking this patch as returned with feedback.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-01-31 06:52:13 Re: [PATCH] ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES with GRANT/REVOKE ON SCHEMAS
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-01-31 06:48:27 Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm.