Re: Avoid overhead open-close indexes (catalog updates)

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Avoid overhead open-close indexes (catalog updates)
Date: 2022-11-16 07:23:41
Message-ID: Y3SP/ZeubfnazUJO@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 06:58:01AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This one has been left out on purpose. I was tempting to use
> WithInfo() with a CatalogIndexState opened optionally but I got the
> impression that it makes the code a bit harder to follow and
> AddRoleMems() is already complex on its own. Most DDL patterns
> working on role would involve one role. More roles could be added of
> course in one shot, but the extra logic complexity did not look that
> appealing to me especially as some role updates are skipped.

I have worked more on that today, and applied all that after splitting
the whole in three commits in total as different areas were touched.
It looks like we are good for this thread, then.

I have spotted more optimizations possible, particularly for operator
classes, but that could happen later.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Naylor 2022-11-16 07:39:00 Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum
Previous Message Himanshu Upadhyaya 2022-11-16 07:11:13 Re: HOT chain validation in verify_heapam()