Re: Why latestRemovedXid|cuteoff_xid are always sent?

From: Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why latestRemovedXid|cuteoff_xid are always sent?
Date: 2021-01-08 08:18:53
Message-ID: CANtu0ojJoKEjW2dNcy+W8SPgs5XiErXY0dERf411iLPSz9HWYw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello, Peter.

Thanks for your explanation. One of the reasons I was asking - is an idea
to use the same technique in the "LP_DEAD index hint bits on standby" WIP
patch to reduce the amount of additional WAL.

Now I am sure such optimization should work correctly.

Thanks,
Michail.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message japin 2021-01-08 08:20:15 Re: EXPLAIN/EXPLAIN ANALYZE REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2021-01-08 07:34:43 Re: WIP: System Versioned Temporal Table