From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring |
Date: | 2024-03-27 19:37:50 |
Message-ID: | 20240327193750.3mlcmzqondpj27xe@liskov |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 12:07:09PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 06:37:20PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 5:59 PM Tomas Vondra
> > <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > BTW when you say "up to 'Make table_scan_bitmap_next_block() async
> > > friendly'" do you mean including that patch, or that this is the first
> > > patch that is not one of the independently useful patches.
> >
> > I think the code is easier to understand with "Make
> > table_scan_bitmap_next_block() async friendly". Prior to that commit,
> > table_scan_bitmap_next_block() could return false even when the bitmap
> > has more blocks and expects the caller to handle this and invoke it
> > again. I think that interface is very confusing. The downside of the
> > code in that state is that the code for prefetching is still in the
> > BitmapHeapNext() code and the code for getting the current block is in
> > the heap AM-specific code. I took a stab at fixing this in v9's 0013,
> > but the outcome wasn't very attractive.
> >
> > What I will do tomorrow is reorder and group the commits such that all
> > of the commits that are useful independent of streaming read are first
> > (I think 0014 and 0015 are independently valuable but they are on top
> > of some things that are only useful to streaming read because they are
> > more recently requested changes). I think I can actually do a bit of
> > simplification in terms of how many commits there are and what is in
> > each. Just to be clear, v9 is still reviewable. I am just going to go
> > back and change what is included in each commit.
>
> So, attached v10 does not include the new version of streaming read API.
> I focused instead on the refactoring patches commit regrouping I
> mentioned here.
Attached v11 has the updated Read Stream API Thomas sent this morning
[1]. No other changes.
- Melanie
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ranier Vilela | 2024-03-27 19:46:57 | Re: Slow GRANT ROLE on PostgreSQL 16 with thousands of ROLEs |
Previous Message | Maciek Sakrejda | 2024-03-27 19:10:02 | Re: Possibility to disable `ALTER SYSTEM` |