| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nikhil Kumar Veldanda <veldanda(dot)nikhilkumar17(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Dead code with short varlenas in toast_save_datum() |
| Date: | 2025-08-17 06:26:20 |
| Message-ID: | aKF2DMi2vjQC5dOp@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 02:34:02AM -0700, Nikhil Kumar Veldanda wrote:
> Thanks for the guidance. I’ve updated the isolation test to use a CTAS
> capturing (id, chunk_id) pre-CLUSTER and added a post-CLUSTER join to
> verify the chunk IDs match. I also reduced the number of tuples to 1.
>
> Please find the attached patch for your review. Thanks
Cool, thanks for the new patch. The structure looks OK. There were
two things that itched me a bit:
- Instead of reporting the number of tuples where the chunk IDs do not
match across the rewrites, I have rewritten the query to report the
serial IDs, instead.
- Making sure that the CTAS holds some data, matching with the number
of tuples inserted. A count(*) was enough for that.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Naga Appani | 2025-08-17 06:27:29 | Re: [Proposal] Expose internal MultiXact member count function for efficient monitoring |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-08-17 06:19:03 | Re: Remove Instruction Synchronization Barrier in spin_delay() for ARM64 architecture |