| From: | Юрий Соколов <funny(dot)falcon(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sokolov Yura <funny(dot)falcon(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Small improvement to compactify_tuples |
| Date: | 2017-11-07 22:40:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAL-rCA0f7e96XKwHHa6TCNBdPBDC5XpeZ2BHV6pyp8-a2rTA=Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2017-11-08 1:11 GMT+03:00 Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>:
>
> The same is true of unique indexes vs. non-unique.
offtopic: recently I'd a look at setting LP_DEAD in indexes.
I didn't found huge difference between unique and non-unique indices.
There is codepath that works only for unique, but it is called less
frequently than common codepath that also sets LP_DEAD.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-11-07 22:43:58 | Re: [PATCH] Assert that the correct locks are held when calling PageGetLSN() |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-11-07 22:36:40 | Re: Small improvement to compactify_tuples |