Re: index prefetching

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, Alexandre Felipe <o(dot)alexandre(dot)felipe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Georgios <gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: index prefetching
Date: 2026-02-18 05:02:34
Message-ID: CAH2-Wz=Ag3hrX-YWQAh1NYcvV5ZUzuenVnuZ-+4w55GL6hwpAQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 8:11 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> FWIW, the version of the patch you're using is slightly different to
> the one I have here. Since I worked on unrelated issues with things
> like the cost of rescans with nestloop joins. Another difference is
> that the memory allocation for the VM cache is now combined with the
> main batch alloc, which seems to be more cache efficient. And saves us
> memory for plain index scans.

Here's a rebased branch with all of those mostly-unrelated optimization:

https://github.com/petergeoghegan/postgres/tree/index-prefetch-master-vmcache-rescan-optimizations

I suggest that you work off of this, on the off chance that these new
optimizations end up mattering. Which is quite possible with anything
that involves an index-only scan.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mahendra Singh Thalor 2026-02-18 05:15:36 Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2026-02-18 04:48:49 Re: [PATCH] Support automatic sequence replication