| From: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key |
| Date: | 2022-03-15 21:54:08 |
| Message-ID: | CAM-w4HO3+v2Jtxc5P4eWB5DW9m4vyfUJb8eR9c8Akcf3SSMJgQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
There are a whole lot of different patches in this thread.
However this last one https://commitfest.postgresql.org/37/3270/
created by Amit seems like a fairly straightforward optimization that
can be evaluated on its own separately from the others and seems quite
mature. I'm actually inclined to set it to "Ready for Committer".
Incidentally a quick read-through of the patch myself and the only
question I have is how the parameters of the adaptive algorithm were
chosen. They seem ludicrously conservative to me and a bit of simple
arguments about how expensive an extra check is versus the time saved
in the boolean search should be easy enough to come up with to justify
whatever values make sense.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2022-03-15 22:02:37 | Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements? |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-03-15 21:48:24 | Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum? |