Re: Reducing the size of BufferTag & remodeling forks

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reducing the size of BufferTag & remodeling forks
Date: 2016-04-21 18:25:06
Message-ID: 20160421182506.3zxoigyuantoa7ji@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-04-19 15:44:36 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > I've actually changed course a bit and I'm trying something different: A
> > two level structure. One hashtable that maps (RelFileNode, ForkNumber)
> > to a 'open relation' data structure, and from there a radix tree over
> > just the block number. To avoid having to look up in the hashtable
> > frequently there's a pointer in RelationData to a fork's radix tree.
>
> Is this going anywhere, or did you drop the subject altogether?

I've postponed working on it a bit, as it was becoming clearer that 9.6
wasn't a realistic target. I do plan to pick this up again once we're in
beta.

Any specific reason for asking?

Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-04-21 18:45:16 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Inline initial comparisons in TestForOldSnapshot()
Previous Message Andres Freund 2016-04-21 18:22:53 Re: kqueue