| From: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Faster inserts with mostly-monotonically increasing values |
| Date: | 2018-04-10 14:20:16 |
| Message-ID: | CABOikdO10xN-jjS1H_5dZCwzZh9FL7gzgFzqP5Jz4iUbMPqybQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Why is this RelationSetTargetBlock() call inside the "XLOG stuff" block?
> > ISTM that we're failing to take advantage of this optimization for
> unlogged
> > tables, for no particular reason. Just an oversight?
> >
> > - Heikki
>
> Indeed.
>
> Maybe Pavan knows of one, but I don't see any reason not to apply this
> to unlogged tables as well. It slipped the review.
>
Yes, looks like an oversight :-( I will fix it along with the other changes
that Peter requested.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeevan Chalke | 2018-04-10 14:27:51 | Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping |
| Previous Message | Claudio Freire | 2018-04-10 14:19:00 | Re: Faster inserts with mostly-monotonically increasing values |