Re: Eliminate redundant tuple visibility check in vacuum

On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 3:53 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > static int heap_prune_chain(Buffer buffer,
> > > OffsetNumber rootoffnum,
> > > + int8 *htsv,
> > > PruneState *prstate);
> >
> > Hm, do we really want to pass this explicitly to a bunch of functions? Seems
> > like it might be better to either pass the PruneResult around or to have a
> > pointer in PruneState?
>
> As far as I can see, 0002 adds it to one function (heap_page_pune) and
> 0003 adds it to one more (heap_prune_chain). That's not much of a
> bunch.

I didn't read this carefully enough. Actually, heap_prune_chain() is
the *only* function that gets int8 *htsv as an argument. I don't
understand how that's a bunch ... unless there are later patches not
shown here that you're worried abot. What happens in 0002 is a
function getting PruneResult * as an argument, not int8 *htsv.

Honestly I think 0002 and 0003 are ready to commit, if you're not too
opposed to them, or if we can find some relatively small changes that
would address your objections.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com