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

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: amborodin(at)acm(dot)org
Cc: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, 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: 2017-03-16 18:55:11
Message-ID: CAH2-Wz==43fmY1B3HiY7B+AqJVqsvqxJZiXRik05gsKM6_3Suw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Andrew Borodin <borodin(at)octonica(dot)com> wrote:
> 2. Thus, L&S fully concurrent vacuum is possible, indeed, and
> furthermore Theodor suggested that I should implement not only page
> eviction, but also page merge and tree condence algorithm.

I think that it's very hard to make merging of pages that are not
completely empty work, while also using the L&Y algorithm.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2017-03-16 18:58:44 Re: pgbench more operators & functions
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-03-16 18:55:05 Re: logical replication launcher crash on buildfarm