Re: [WIP]Vertical Clustered Index (columnar store extension) - take2

From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Timur Magomedov <t(dot)magomedov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, "Aya Iwata (Fujitsu)" <iwata(dot)aya(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [WIP]Vertical Clustered Index (columnar store extension) - take2
Date: 2025-05-30 01:38:20
Message-ID: CAHut+Pu+r_XGZXM=QkGbNJ0NwNYjQq3Hii8uqPrJ2DwO+cXQgw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Timur.

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 11:30 PM Timur Magomedov
<t(dot)magomedov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
> I've noticed there are changes in Postgres code v4 patch that rollback
> the commit [1]. That commit optimizes TupleHashEntryData struct size
> and amount of memory allocations which improves performance (see
> discussion [2]).
> Can we use leave TupleHashEntryData as is and make new VCI-specific
> struct that contains TupleHashEntryData member and an additional
> pointer or make VCI use TupleHashEntryGetAdditional()?
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/174581/v9-0004-Remove-additional-pointer-from-TupleHashEntryData.patch
> [2]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/817d244237878cebdff0bc363718feaf49a1ea7d.camel%40j-davis.com

Thank you for noticing and reporting this!

It was not intentional to roll back changes to core PostgreSQL. These
VCI patches originated from an older forked source, so it seems this
reversion was inadvertently introduced during the rebasing process.

We’ll aim to correct this in a future patch.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2025-05-30 04:18:52 Re: Proposal: Make cfbot fail on patches not created by "git format-patch"
Previous Message Andy Fan 2025-05-30 01:23:13 Re: Expression push down from Join Node to below node.