Re: GIN logging GIN_SEGMENT_UNMODIFIED actions?

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GIN logging GIN_SEGMENT_UNMODIFIED actions?
Date: 2016-12-05 11:39:07
Message-ID: CAHGQGwFTFScvvki9u_kNwiTLr0HeUzZ97g+mM277A3H=RTvyAQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I applied your suggested changes into the patch. Patch attached.
>
> That looks pretty sane to me (but I just eyeballed it, didn't test).
>
> One further minor improvement would be to rearrange the
> XLOG_GIN_VACUUM_DATA_LEAF_PAGE case so that we don't bother calling
> XLogRecGetBlockData() if there's a full-page image.

Pushed the patch with this improvement. Thanks!

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2016-12-05 11:45:00 Re: Random number generation, take two
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2016-12-05 11:20:45 Re: Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw