Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15)

From: Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Максим Орлов <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ilya Anfimov <ilan(at)tzirechnoy(dot)com>
Subject: Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15)
Date: 2022-03-19 09:52:35
Message-ID: CALT9ZEHNcSQaQHpuxuAN7JpwacwuOFK8tgEAtwUDa=8x7P82wA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 2022-03-18 18:14:52 +0300, Maxim Orlov wrote:
> > Subject: [PATCH v22 3/6] Use 64-bit pages in SLRU
> >
> > This is one step toward 64-bit XIDs.
>
> I think this should explain in more detail why this move is done. Neither
> the
> commit message nor the rest of the thread does so afaics. It's not too
> hard to
> infer, but the central reason behind a patch shouldn't need to be inferred.
>
>
> > -static bool CLOGPagePrecedes(int page1, int page2);
> > +static bool CLOGPagePrecedes(int64 page1, int64 page2);
>
> I think all of these are actually unsigned integers. If all of this stuff
> gets
> touched, perhaps worth moving to uint64 instead?
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220318231430.m5g56yk4ztlz2man%40alap3.anarazel.de

We'll try to add these and many similar changes in Slru code, thanks!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2022-03-19 10:31:59 Re: Tab completion for ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW ... SET ACCESS METHOD
Previous Message Noah Misch 2022-03-19 08:47:04 Re: Why is src/test/modules/committs/t/002_standby.pl flaky?