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

From: Andrew Borodin <borodin(at)octonica(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
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 19:01:26
Message-ID: CAJEAwVEdJSU0OpdTGBsBBLeHKL0VAnC+yz+ii4Lt+EphU5VpDA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2017-03-16 23:55 GMT+05:00 Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>:
> 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.

That's true. This is a distant plan...

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Denish Patel 2017-03-16 19:04:00 Re: Monitoring roles patch
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2017-03-16 18:58:44 Re: pgbench more operators & functions