From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance |
Date: | 2010-04-16 12:00:22 |
Message-ID: | 1271419222.8305.8131.camel@ebony |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:47 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 11:29 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> How does the attached patch look like? It's probably similar to what you
> >> had in mind.
> >
> > It looks like a second version of what I'm working on and about to
> > publish. I'll take that as a compliment!
> >
> > My patch is attached here also, for discussion.
> >
> > The two patches look same in their main parts, though I have quite a few
> > extra tweaks in there, which you can read about in comments.
>
> Yeah. Yours seems a lot more complex with all those extra tweaks, I
> would suggest to keep it simple. I did realize one bug in my patch: I
> didn't handle xid wraparound correctly in the binary search, need to use
> TransactionIdFollows instead of plan >.
Almost done, yes, much simpler. I wrote a lot of that in the wee small
hours last night, so the difference is amusing.
And I spotted that bug, plus the off by one error also. Just rewritten
all other parts, so no worries.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-04-16 14:39:52 | Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-04-16 11:47:42 | Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance |