| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Batch TIDs lookup in ambulkdelete |
| Date: | 2025-06-09 19:29:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoAcfp5kdcsT5727Vw4JF-Rw7b73zXh_GwXqNHg3P7-UoA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 4:28 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 6:58 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Agreed. Given the above test results, it's unlikely always sorting the
> > array helps speedups.
>
> Did you try specializing the sort? In my experience, it makes a big difference.
Thank you for the suggestion. I've done the same performance test with
the suggestion. The difference seems to be within an acceptable range.
HEAD PATCHED DIFF
case-6: 3,320 ms 3,374 ms 101.63%
I've attached the patches I used for this evaluation.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-Fix-maxblkno-constant-to-use-MaxBlockNumber-in-te.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.7 KB |
| v3-0003-Convert-IndexBulkDeleteCallback-to-process-TIDs-i.patch | application/octet-stream | 9.3 KB |
| v3-0002-tidstore.c-introduce-TidStoreIsMemberMulti.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.7 KB |
| v3-0004-Use-batch-TIDs-lookup-in-btree-index-bulk-deletio.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2025-06-09 19:48:49 | Re: pg_rewind: Doc update for PostgreSQL 18 |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-06-09 19:15:02 | Re: pg_rewind: Doc update for PostgreSQL 18 |