Re: eliminate xl_heap_visible to reduce WAL (and eventually set VM on-access)

From: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: eliminate xl_heap_visible to reduce WAL (and eventually set VM on-access)
Date: 2025-11-19 09:35:39
Message-ID: CALdSSPg+B8RTzTXhJvCcKJBqgzhPZkq0E2oqxQdv74ZNZOMVzg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 18 Nov 2025 at 04:07, Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Attached v20 has general cleanup, changes to the table/index AM
> callbacks detailed below, and it moves the
> heap_page_prune_and_freeze() refactoring commit down the stack to
> 0004.
>
> 0001 - 0003 are fairly trivial cleanup patches. I think they are ready
> to commit, so if I don't hear any objections in the next few days,
> I'll go ahead and commit them.
>

Hi! I looked up these 0002-0003 patches once again, LGTM. In
particular, I think 0002 & 0003 makes VM bits management more simple.
My only review comment is about 0003:
Should we make frz_conflict_horizon not a heap_page_will_freeze's
argument but rather just another field of PruneState struct? If i'm
not mistaken, 'frz_conflict_horizon' fits good to be a part of pruning
state

--
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-11-19 09:36:55 Re: backend/nodes cleanup: Move loop variables definitions into for statement
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-11-19 09:31:10 Re: Update timezone to C99