| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Ideriha, Takeshi" <ideriha(dot)takeshi(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: performance issue in remove_from_unowned_list() |
| Date: | 2019-03-06 19:04:27 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobavePOgpAvBar6Ej2AsPMvcHgaqkFgsuCqBgibr45L8g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 1:53 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 2019-Feb-08, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > I'm wondering if we should just get rid of all such optimizations, and
> > make the unowned list doubly-linked (WIP patch attached, needs fixing
> > the comments etc.).
>
> +1 for that approach.
+1 for me, too.
> Did you consider using a dlist?
Maybe that is worthwhile, but this is a smaller change, which I think
should count for quite a bit. Nothing keeps somebody from doing the
dlist change as a separate patch, if desired.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-03-06 19:06:38 | Re: performance issue in remove_from_unowned_list() |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-03-06 18:55:14 | Re: New vacuum option to do only freezing |