Re: Moving _bt_readpage and _bt_checkkeys into a new .c file

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Moving _bt_readpage and _bt_checkkeys into a new .c file
Date: 2025-12-07 22:30:54
Message-ID: CAH2-Wz=5-iS2oXTG-Zxu1Jwz0T8SpEYaJpa8M2iKoFRcvGPGAw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 9:44 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> Since this ignore_killed_tuples change is also very simple, and also
> seems like an easy win, I think that it can be committed as part of
> the second patch. Without it needing to wait for too much more
> performance validation.

My plan is to commit the entire patch series (with a modified second
patch that includes the ignore_killed_tuples change) in the next
couple of days.

As far as I can determine through performance validation that tested a
variety of different scan types (simple point lookups, range scans,
and a variety of different SAOP scan patterns), the patch series is an
unambiguous win. It appears to be slightly faster even in
unsympathetic cases, such as standard pgbench SELECT.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2025-12-07 23:10:00 Re: Fix incorrect comments in tuplesort.c
Previous Message Mihail Nikalayeu 2025-12-07 22:18:22 Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY